|
Gorlax



Registered: 05/06/08
Posts: 6,695
Last seen: 16 days, 17 hours
|
|
this thread went off topic since i've been gone. lol..
TRUMP 2k16
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: KauaiOrca]
#22077512 - 08/11/15 05:40 PM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
KauaiOrca said: How many "FEDS" have you and your buddies had to "fend" off this year with guns?
I don't get your point. I am not saying that it's very frequent that the average people have had to take up arms against feds. I am saying that having a gun is necessary for the average citizen IN THE EVENT of the government becoming tyrannical (which is a very definite possibility) and then sending out its agents against the average folk.
You cant say that our government will NEVER become tyrannical, can you?
p.s. have you heard of Ruby Ridge?
p.s.s you seem to be making light of my concern. I just want to say that I have done nothing to deserve this.
Edited by WAN (08/11/15 05:47 PM)
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,368
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 3 hours, 28 minutes
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: WAN]
#22077533 - 08/11/15 05:43 PM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
WAN said:
Quote:
KauaiOrca said: How many "FEDS" have you and your buddies had to "fend" off this year with guns?
I don't get your point. I am not saying that it's very frequent that the average people have had to take up arms against feds. I am saying that having a gun is necessary for the average citizen IN THE EVENT of the government becoming tyrannical (which is a very definite possibility) and then sending out its agents against the average folk.
You cant say that our government will NEVER become tyrannical, can you?
p.s. have you heard of Ruby Ridge?
Our government's been tyrannical from the start, I do agree with you though about the need for a "militia" and the 2nd amendment puts it.
--------------------
|
KauaiOrca
Waterman


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 3,131
|
|
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
During world war II the United states rounded up the Japanese and put them in camps, no courts, no due process, not only can it happen, it does happen all the time, not so often in the first world, but it's common.
I'm not going to speculate on how it can happen, but that attitude that it's a near impossibility and something we need not consider is the exact attitude that most have just before their government turns on them...
..I'm not trying to stir up fear, I'm saying just that fact that my freedoms being taken is a possibility means I should have the right to defend them.
The founding fathers intentionally granted us every right we would need to maintain a free and just society, like I said before, they understood what made them powerless n England and ensured that Americans will have protected rights to prevent them from becoming powerless again.
I don't like that the KKK can hold events on the capitol steps, but I'll fight to the death to defend their first amendment right to do it...you may not like the idea that guns are necessary to defend yourself and your freedoms, you may think that we can have a free population that is also disarmed, you may feel the government has the right to tell you that you can't own guns, but the fact is it was put in the constitution with good reason, these men know the tools oppression needs to maintain its power, and with the constitution the were trying to give you some equality here, and insurance that you will have a fighting chance should the time to defend your freedoms come.
...say the day never comes, I still have the right to own arms so I know I can defend myself should I have to.
-E. Borodin
I think American Citizens have the right to own a reasonable amount of arms ... certainly not an arsenal ... no tanks or missiles or attack aircraft.
I think these citizens should not be dependent on chemicals (alcohol, mood pills, pain pills, etc.) or have psychological problems or disorders. That's all I'm saying. A gun in the hand of every American regardless of their psychological problems or chemical dependency is absolutely idiotic in 2015.
-------------------- "The universe is endless, limitless and infinite. Any effort to define it's boundaries is an attempt to overcome ignorance. We are physical, mental and spiritual beings ... there is no beginning and there is no end. There is only memory. Our repeated loss of memory experiences create the illusion of beginnings and ends. Immortality is the ability to retain full memory through all consciousness transformations. Loss of memory is man's greatest curse and, in very real terms, death." -- Ancient Taoist Master
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,344
Last seen: 10 minutes, 39 seconds
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: KauaiOrca]
#22079460 - 08/12/15 12:08 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
KauaiOrca said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
During world war II the United states rounded up the Japanese and put them in camps, no courts, no due process, not only can it happen, it does happen all the time, not so often in the first world, but it's common.
I'm not going to speculate on how it can happen, but that attitude that it's a near impossibility and something we need not consider is the exact attitude that most have just before their government turns on them...
..I'm not trying to stir up fear, I'm saying just that fact that my freedoms being taken is a possibility means I should have the right to defend them.
The founding fathers intentionally granted us every right we would need to maintain a free and just society, like I said before, they understood what made them powerless n England and ensured that Americans will have protected rights to prevent them from becoming powerless again.
I don't like that the KKK can hold events on the capitol steps, but I'll fight to the death to defend their first amendment right to do it...you may not like the idea that guns are necessary to defend yourself and your freedoms, you may think that we can have a free population that is also disarmed, you may feel the government has the right to tell you that you can't own guns, but the fact is it was put in the constitution with good reason, these men know the tools oppression needs to maintain its power, and with the constitution the were trying to give you some equality here, and insurance that you will have a fighting chance should the time to defend your freedoms come.
...say the day never comes, I still have the right to own arms so I know I can defend myself should I have to.
-E. Borodin
I think American Citizens have the right to own a reasonable amount of arms ... certainly not an arsenal ... no tanks or missiles or attack aircraft.
I think these citizens should not be dependent on chemicals (alcohol, mood pills, pain pills, etc.) or have psychological problems or disorders. That's all I'm saying. A gun in the hand of every American regardless of their psychological problems or chemical dependency is absolutely idiotic in 2015.
I think that police also shouldn't be allowed tanks, missiles or nuclear bombs also, but Republicans aren't having that!
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: KauaiOrca]
#22080259 - 08/12/15 07:50 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
KauaiOrca said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
During world war II the United states rounded up the Japanese and put them in camps, no courts, no due process, not only can it happen, it does happen all the time, not so often in the first world, but it's common.
I'm not going to speculate on how it can happen, but that attitude that it's a near impossibility and something we need not consider is the exact attitude that most have just before their government turns on them...
..I'm not trying to stir up fear, I'm saying just that fact that my freedoms being taken is a possibility means I should have the right to defend them.
The founding fathers intentionally granted us every right we would need to maintain a free and just society, like I said before, they understood what made them powerless n England and ensured that Americans will have protected rights to prevent them from becoming powerless again.
I don't like that the KKK can hold events on the capitol steps, but I'll fight to the death to defend their first amendment right to do it...you may not like the idea that guns are necessary to defend yourself and your freedoms, you may think that we can have a free population that is also disarmed, you may feel the government has the right to tell you that you can't own guns, but the fact is it was put in the constitution with good reason, these men know the tools oppression needs to maintain its power, and with the constitution the were trying to give you some equality here, and insurance that you will have a fighting chance should the time to defend your freedoms come.
...say the day never comes, I still have the right to own arms so I know I can defend myself should I have to.
-E. Borodin
I think American Citizens have the right to own a reasonable amount of arms ... certainly not an arsenal ... no tanks or missiles or attack aircraft.
I think these citizens should not be dependent on chemicals (alcohol, mood pills, pain pills, etc.) or have psychological problems or disorders. That's all I'm saying. A gun in the hand of every American regardless of their psychological problems or chemical dependency is absolutely idiotic in 2015.
We must be VERY VERY VERY careful in deciding what qualifies you for disarmament, it starts reasonable, but the fascists already have their foot in the door at the point, slowly they add new regulations limiting more and more people until over time nearly nobody qualifies to own a gun...
Drug use should not disqualify you, look at Hunter Thompson, he did damn near own an arsenal, and was loaded 24/7, and never did he hurt another person, even during his wild drugged out antics involving guns...
I think that you can't prevent psychos from committing their crimes, they will buy a "ghost gun" which is an illegal gun, homemade from scrap metal and sold on the black market after being dressed with fake numbers making it look legit...Or they will get a gun some other way
No matter how much control we put on these things the people who want to shoot people will find a way to do so regardless, these regulations are just going to hurt honest people, and could lead to the loss of the 2nd amendment.
I believe it's not the government's job to tell us what property we can and can't own, or what foods we can eat or what drugs we can use, and it's not their job to protect us, specially from ourselves...
But, I'm sure we are going to have to agree to disagree here, it's not a debate that can be ended with any one argument, though if the constitution says every American has the RIGHT to bare arms, then regardless every American deserves the right to bare arms, that's my take on it any way...
-E. Borodin
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#22080273 - 08/12/15 07:55 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
KauaiOrca said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
During world war II the United states rounded up the Japanese and put them in camps, no courts, no due process, not only can it happen, it does happen all the time, not so often in the first world, but it's common.
I'm not going to speculate on how it can happen, but that attitude that it's a near impossibility and something we need not consider is the exact attitude that most have just before their government turns on them...
..I'm not trying to stir up fear, I'm saying just that fact that my freedoms being taken is a possibility means I should have the right to defend them.
The founding fathers intentionally granted us every right we would need to maintain a free and just society, like I said before, they understood what made them powerless n England and ensured that Americans will have protected rights to prevent them from becoming powerless again.
I don't like that the KKK can hold events on the capitol steps, but I'll fight to the death to defend their first amendment right to do it...you may not like the idea that guns are necessary to defend yourself and your freedoms, you may think that we can have a free population that is also disarmed, you may feel the government has the right to tell you that you can't own guns, but the fact is it was put in the constitution with good reason, these men know the tools oppression needs to maintain its power, and with the constitution the were trying to give you some equality here, and insurance that you will have a fighting chance should the time to defend your freedoms come.
...say the day never comes, I still have the right to own arms so I know I can defend myself should I have to.
-E. Borodin
I think American Citizens have the right to own a reasonable amount of arms ... certainly not an arsenal ... no tanks or missiles or attack aircraft.
I think these citizens should not be dependent on chemicals (alcohol, mood pills, pain pills, etc.) or have psychological problems or disorders. That's all I'm saying. A gun in the hand of every American regardless of their psychological problems or chemical dependency is absolutely idiotic in 2015.
I think that police also shouldn't be allowed tanks, missiles or nuclear bombs also, but Republicans aren't having that!
Police forces all over the country were given surplus from the army and feds, so now local police forces are armed like an army...this means if crowds peacefully assemble and the police want to remove them, now they have as much as the national guard and army in turns of arms...
The 1033 Program was created by the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 1997 as part of the U.S. Government's Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services (DLA) to transfer excess military equipment to civilian law enforcement agencies. As of 2014, 8,000 local law enforcement agencies participated in the reutilization program that has transferred $5.1 billion in military hardware from the Department of Defense to local American law enforcement agencies since 1997.-Wikipedia
...and people call me paranoid, it should be disturbing to see local police forces arming themselves like an army
Police shouldn't be allowed to even carry guns, if they can't do their job with a tazer and a Billy-club then they don't deserve to be police...
-E. Borodin
Edited by Coincidentiaoppositorum (08/12/15 07:56 AM)
|
KauaiOrca
Waterman


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 3,131
|
|
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
Police shouldn't be allowed to even carry guns, if they can't do their job with a tazer and a Billy-club then they don't deserve to be police...
-E. Borodin
Using your logic, aren't police officers citizens? Why would they be denied the right to use arms to defend themselves?
-------------------- "The universe is endless, limitless and infinite. Any effort to define it's boundaries is an attempt to overcome ignorance. We are physical, mental and spiritual beings ... there is no beginning and there is no end. There is only memory. Our repeated loss of memory experiences create the illusion of beginnings and ends. Immortality is the ability to retain full memory through all consciousness transformations. Loss of memory is man's greatest curse and, in very real terms, death." -- Ancient Taoist Master
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,509
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
|
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
Drug use should not disqualify you, look at Hunter Thompson, he did damn near own an arsenal, and was loaded 24/7, and never did he hurt another person, even during his wild drugged out antics involving guns...
You do realize that Hunter S. Thompson used a gun to sink a bunch of boats, right? That's hardly an argument for why drug use shouldn't disqualify you.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,344
Last seen: 10 minutes, 39 seconds
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Enlil]
#22082485 - 08/12/15 05:34 PM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
Drug use should not disqualify you, look at Hunter Thompson, he did damn near own an arsenal, and was loaded 24/7, and never did he hurt another person, even during his wild drugged out antics involving guns...
You do realize that Hunter S. Thompson used a gun to sink a bunch of boats, right? That's hardly an argument for why drug use shouldn't disqualify you.
I didn't realize that, but that's some hilarious imagery.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Enlil]
#22084972 - 08/13/15 05:51 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
Drug use should not disqualify you, look at Hunter Thompson, he did damn near own an arsenal, and was loaded 24/7, and never did he hurt another person, even during his wild drugged out antics involving guns...
You do realize that Hunter S. Thompson used a gun to sink a bunch of boats, right? That's hardly an argument for why drug use shouldn't disqualify you.
I think it is, if a guy like Hunter Thompson had an arsenal and some property destruction was the only negative result than I'd say drug use does not mean you will hurt another human.
What about marijuana and alcohol? What about prescription opioids and benzodiazepines?
Being a drug user does not make you dangerous in and of itself.
Regardless, the founding fathers promised us the right to bare arms, this could not be more clear, and was not time sensitive, if you start trying to put regulations on our constitutional rights then what's next? Will free speech only apply to people who don't use drugs? You see where I'm heading with this, and like it or not it's a guaranteed constitutional right, like I said before, nobody likes that the KKK can use the first amendment to rally on the capitol steps, but people understand why even that is not a reason to start to try to regulate the first amendment....
Do you want to be free and take some personal responsibility? Or do you want the government to regulate and dictate all the things you can and can not do?...
-E. Borodin
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,509
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
|
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
I think it is, if a guy like Hunter Thompson had an arsenal and some property destruction was the only negative result than I'd say drug use does not mean you will hurt another human.
If someone had been sleeping in one of those boats, he/she could easily have been harmed.
Thompson got lucky. A rational person would have known that shooting boats creates a great risk to human life. He didn't. I wonder why not...
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Enlil]
#22085220 - 08/13/15 07:53 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
I think it is, if a guy like Hunter Thompson had an arsenal and some property destruction was the only negative result than I'd say drug use does not mean you will hurt another human.
If someone had been sleeping in one of those boats, he/she could easily have been harmed.
Thompson got lucky. A rational person would have known that shooting boats creates a great risk to human life. He didn't. I wonder why not...
Yeah, but nobody did get hurt, you can't judge him for something that "could" have happened.
Thompson was an extreme example, which was sort of the point.
Regardless as I said before: Quote:
the founding fathers promised us the right to bare arms, this could not be more clear, and was not time sensitive, if you start trying to put regulations on our constitutional rights then what's next? Will free speech only apply to people who don't use drugs? You see where I'm heading with this, and like it or not it's a guaranteed constitutional right, like I said before, nobody likes that the KKK can use the first amendment to rally on the capitol steps, but people understand why even that is not a reason to start to try to regulate the first amendment....
Do you want to be free and take some personal responsibility? Or do you want the government to regulate and dictate all the things you can and can not do?..
And this was the real point I was trying to make...
-E. Borodin
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,509
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
|
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said: Yeah, but nobody did get hurt, you can't judge him for something that "could" have happened.
I can judge him for his conduct. His conduct was beyond reckless and he acted with total disregard for the safety of others. He got lucky that no one got hurt. If you can judge him based on his luck, I can certainly judge him based on his conduct.
Thompson, a serious drug user, did something terribly reckless. You, a presumed drug user, can't see how reckless his conduct was.
Is this argument really supporting your position?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Enlil]
#22085299 - 08/13/15 08:19 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said: Yeah, but nobody did get hurt, you can't judge him for something that "could" have happened.
I can judge him for his conduct. His conduct was beyond reckless and he acted with total disregard for the safety of others. He got lucky that no one got hurt. If you can judge him based on his luck, I can certainly judge him based on his conduct.
Thompson, a serious drug user, did something terribly reckless. You, a presumed drug user, can't see how reckless his conduct was.
Is this argument really supporting your position?
I think your missing the point of my argument, I was saying that if a man like Thompson could have guns his whole life, being a reckless drug abuser and nothing happened, even in the most extreme cases of abuse human injury is not promised.
Regardless, where do you draw the line? With marijuana? Alcohol? Prescription pills?
Again it all comes back to my initial post: Quote:
the founding fathers promised us the right to bare arms, this could not be more clear, and was not time sensitive, if you start trying to put regulations on our constitutional rights then what's next? Will free speech only apply to people who don't use drugs? You see where I'm heading with this, and like it or not it's a guaranteed constitutional right, like I said before, nobody likes that the KKK can use the first amendment to rally on the capitol steps, but people understand why even that is not a reason to start to try to regulate the first amendment....
Do you want to be free and take some personal responsibility? Or do you want the government to regulate and dictate all the things you can and can not do?..
Which was and still is the ultimate point I was trying to make...
The Thompson example was quick and off the top of my head, if it's flawed it's flawed, though I still think the fact that being a drugged out reckless maniac and owning hundreds of guns his whole life, and he STILL never shot anybody but himself, should speak to the argument that just because a person uses drugs does not mean they are dangerous, and the government does not have the right to label you dangerous before you have ever hurt anybody...we already do not allow felons to own guns, they have shown the were dangerous, they lost the right, but judging before hand is like "pre-crime", your punishing them for something that "could" happen.
Personal responsibility means you accept the risks as part of the burden of bearing such freedom, you can't try to prevent them in advance, you deal with them as they come, and instead of trying to alter or abolish the second amendment we need to accept that crazy people are going to commit these acts, and even if we banned guns they would find another way to carry out their plans...
-E. Borodin
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,509
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
|
I am always in favor of civil rights. I am a huge proponent of the 2nd amendment, but I recognize that it isn't an absolute right. No right is.
I've never advocated that drug users should lose gun rights, but I do believe that people with serious drug addictions probably should. How "serious drug addiction" is defined would have to be hashed out, though.
For me, once a drug addiction reaches the level of being a mental illness wherein one loses one's ability to rationally control his/her own behavior, it's time to take the guns.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
resonant111
left ∞ right

Registered: 03/02/11
Posts: 1,952
Loc: IL
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Patlal]
#22085315 - 08/13/15 08:28 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
i'm highly suspicious of politics in general -- it's the only thing where conspiracy theories actually kind of make sense -- especially the whole "dems and repubs are basically on the same page and it's all a show to keep the people stupid and following" type thing.
in this case, seems pretty obv. that trump is that guy who's been planted to say all the things that the majority of americans want to hear: "we're too politically correct, money controls politicians and its unfair to the people, tax the rich" blah blah blah.
i could go on and on, but the stuff trump says sounds like it comes right off the public internet forums. this guy is saying EVERYTHING the average person wants to hear. the media bashing is cleverly calculated to not only give him more attention, but offend the people who support what trump is saying--thereby solidifying in their minds the idea that "this is him, this is the guy that can save us!" This makes them think they're so radical because "i support someone the media is against!"
in this case, trump is that guy that so many people think is going to "Save america" or whatever -- just like obama in 2008. Someone comes in, says all the right things, the people fall for it thinking the person is the second coming or some shit -- nothing actually gets better, 4-8 years later the same bullshit process occurs.
so yea, that's politics in a nutshell--keeps americans glued to this bullshit thinking that there's some magical person out there that's going to fix the system. but the system isn't ever going to be fixed because the rich politicians are on the same team -- they all love this system because it benefits the rich.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,368
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 3 hours, 28 minutes
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Enlil]
#22085611 - 08/13/15 10:07 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
I think it is, if a guy like Hunter Thompson had an arsenal and some property destruction was the only negative result than I'd say drug use does not mean you will hurt another human.
If someone had been sleeping in one of those boats, he/she could easily have been harmed.
Thompson got lucky. A rational person would have known that shooting boats creates a great risk to human life. He didn't. I wonder why not...
Because he was a narcissist.
--------------------
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: Enlil]
#22090245 - 08/14/15 07:41 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: I am always in favor of civil rights. I am a huge proponent of the 2nd amendment, but I recognize that it isn't an absolute right. No right is.
I've never advocated that drug users should lose gun rights, but I do believe that people with serious drug addictions probably should. How "serious drug addiction" is defined would have to be hashed out, though.
For me, once a drug addiction reaches the level of being a mental illness wherein one loses one's ability to rationally control his/her own behavior, it's time to take the guns.
Quote:
Enlil said: I am always in favor of civil rights. I am a huge proponent of the 2nd amendment, but I recognize that it isn't an absolute right. No right is.
I've never advocated that drug users should lose gun rights, but I do believe that people with serious drug addictions probably should. How "serious drug addiction" is defined would have to be hashed out, though.
For me, once a drug addiction reaches the level of being a mental illness wherein one loses one's ability to rationally control his/her own behavior, it's time to take the guns.
I respectfully disagree, I feel all humans are equal and no man has true authority over another, and so long as you are not hurting, bothering, or victimizing anybody it's your God given right to do it. I believe this type of freedom is an absolute right, and anytime you infringe on someone's free right to exist, your acting as a fascist to some extent.
...but I also fully believe in the constitution, if you were forming a true free society a constitution of this sort is an essential first, these rights were not up for debate...
It's not the government's job to regulate your rights to "protect you from the world"
The fact that Americans are for regulating a constitutional right brings a tear to my eye...
is fascism the natural route of controlling the population to be prefered by humans?
We were given these INALIENABLE rights, and rather than fight to the death to protect them people have been suckered into thinking that gun control is going to do anything more than alienate us from our 2nd amendment right.
The alarmist media tries to project this image that we are unsafe and that if we had LESS rights we would somehow be safer...the truth is you could implement all the gun control in the universe and it still would not prevent these incidents, it would be robbing us of a right over paranoia and propaganda it would be demonizing our rights instead of looking at the true issues in search of true solutions...
Do you want to be free and take some personal responsibility?...or do you want the government to regulate and dictate all the things you can and can not do?...
Personal responsibility means bearing the burdens of our freedoms, and there's a price to pay for every freedom we are granted, and if your not willing to pay that price, you loose the freedom...
You said:
Quote:
but I recognize that it isn't an absolute right. No right is.
I must have misunderstood what the founding fathers meant when they said INALIENABLE.
-E. Borodin
|
Coincidentiaoppositorum
deep psychedelic


Registered: 10/27/14
Posts: 1,965
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: So Trump started off badly but he's making more sense every day... [Re: The Ecstatic]
#22090279 - 08/14/15 07:58 AM (8 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Coincidentiaoppositorum said:
I think it is, if a guy like Hunter Thompson had an arsenal and some property destruction was the only negative result than I'd say drug use does not mean you will hurt another human.
If someone had been sleeping in one of those boats, he/she could easily have been harmed.
Thompson got lucky. A rational person would have known that shooting boats creates a great risk to human life. He didn't. I wonder why not...
Because he was a narcissist.
I disagree.
But you would have to actually know about Mr. Thompson and know what he actually did, most people know very little, they have this image of Raul duke and Thompson being one and the same while Thompson was not a fictional character. Most are not even aware of the things Thompson did, they don't know about his covering of the battle of Chicago, they don't remember Hunter for sheriff, they don't recall his political impact, he destroyed ed muskie's political career, he also covered the campaign trail in a way no other journalist dared...It's said that it was the most true but least factual account of what happened...it was far more than drug excess, guns and bombs...
(Actual campaign add for Thompson for sheriff)
(These mountain parts have been and still are a refuge for hip people, Thompson came closer than anyone to taking the community for us...believe it or not he nearly won that election, Carol whitmire had to use every dirty trick possible to keep Thomson from winning..)
-E. Borodin
|
|