|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: koods]
#21936810 - 07/13/15 11:02 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: This tyranny line is NRA PR bullshit.
They're cry-baby conservatives. These people most not have looked past the first couple of paragraphs in the declaration of independence. The claim of tyranny was supported by LOTS of very serious offenses committed by the British government, and those offenses had been going on for a while, and they were seriously hurting the prosperity of the colonies. We even gave the British government chances to change it's ways and address our complaints.
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: koods]
#21936817 - 07/13/15 11:04 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: You'll notice we don't treat our territories with the same rights we have either. TheQuote:
r00tuuu123 said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: Most of their talk/writing was about forming a government. The declaration of independence was short.
Short Who are you to say? Read the whole thing. Your rights to post your opine here is a result of that document Whether the bill of rights or the Pre-Amble Maybe you shuold read it in it's entirenty. The simple fact remains on the second ammendment It was put in place to defend against tyrany of any kind. "hey they got guns" Maybe it should have been the 1st ammendment. But hind sight being 20/20 . Sometimes the power of the sword is greater than the power of the pen.
It's only a few pages long, man, and most of it is bitching about offenses the king committed. I'm not knocking it, it's one of my favorite fuck you statements, but it is short.
I don't know how else to say this. We formed the USA to form a more perfect union of states that required individual military power to adequately deal with military threats. We felt that unity between the states was very important, and nobody wanted it to be able to break down at the drop of a hat. Everybody agreed that militias were vital to the security of the whole nation and the individual states, that's why they get a special mention. It's more about national security than it is about being able to start a revolt when states are unhappy with the federal government. at the time, Revolutions were very uncommon and if you read the page or two of bitching in the declaration of independence, you'll see that the founders felt revolt was justified only under VERY extreme conditions.
The constitution takes a very hard line against rising up against the government: the only crime specifically mentioned in the document is taking up arms against the US AKA treason.
I missed you.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21936828 - 07/13/15 11:08 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: You can repeat that as often as you like. It won't suddenly become correct.
The quotes and writings of those that were there are what they are. They say what they say.
Unless you have something new...
You cherry picked those quotes, and they don't remotely represent a complete picture of what was going on. I promise you, those guys had lots of stuff to talk about that wasn't fear of their own tyrannical government. Your background in early american history is clearly biased by today's crazy political ramblings to the point where you don't understand the founders' motivations for actually forming a government that may one day become tyrannical. Most of the legal writing was put in place to address existing problems, critical thought about ways to avoid domestic tyranny was included to try to fix problems with the previous methods of forming and running governments. The second amendment was put there to make both the state and federal governments better able to deal with military crisis. It's there to increase military power and coverage.
Seeing as they were revolting against a tyrannical government, I'd be so blunt as to say you're full of shit and that you're the one "clearly biased by today's crazy political ramblings to the point where you don't understand the founders' motivations for actually forming a government that may one day become tyrannical."
But hey... enjoy your obtuseness.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
r00tuuu123
Now I'm just really piseed



Registered: 04/20/12
Posts: 8,507
Loc: I'll be there in a minute
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21936829 - 07/13/15 11:09 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said:
Quote:
koods said: This tyranny line is NRA PR bullshit.
They're cry-baby conservatives. These people most not have looked past the first couple of paragraphs in the declaration of independence. The claim of tyranny was supported by LOTS of very serious offenses committed by the British government, and those offenses had been going on for a while, and they were seriously hurting the prosperity of the colonies. We even gave the British government chances to change it's ways and address our complaints.
Hmm It sounds like a wife married to a redneck that gets beat for running out of beer and says fuck off I 'dont need you.
--------------------
Please report me to a Mod for hurting your punk ass hippie feelings And all time Champion thread killer.
|
Sophistic Radiance
Free sVs!


Registered: 07/11/06
Posts: 43,135
Loc: Center of the Universe
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21936831 - 07/13/15 11:10 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It should be more strict than it is now.
-------------------- Enlil said: You really are the worst kind of person.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
Not even a little, but change the Second if you can.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 19 minutes, 3 seconds
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21936847 - 07/13/15 11:15 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The founders solution for a tyrannical government was not the second amendment, it was Article I, II and III of the constitution which set up an elected president, elected members of the house, appointed senators, and a unelected judiciary.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
r00tuuu123
Now I'm just really piseed



Registered: 04/20/12
Posts: 8,507
Loc: I'll be there in a minute
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: koods]
#21936848 - 07/13/15 11:15 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: The constitution takes a very hard line against rising up against the government: the only crime specifically mentioned in the document is taking up arms against the US AKA treason.
Yeah so you put up a united front so What is your prime example of treason?
--------------------
Please report me to a Mod for hurting your punk ass hippie feelings And all time Champion thread killer.
|
Sophistic Radiance
Free sVs!


Registered: 07/11/06
Posts: 43,135
Loc: Center of the Universe
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: koods]
#21936852 - 07/13/15 11:16 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: The founders solution for a tyrannical government was not the second amendment, it was Article I, II and III of the constitution which set up an elected president, elected members of the house, appointed senators, and a unelected judiciary.
How unsatisfyingly nonviolent.
-------------------- Enlil said: You really are the worst kind of person.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 19 minutes, 3 seconds
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: r00tuuu123]
#21936856 - 07/13/15 11:18 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Article III, sec 3 Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21936863 - 07/13/15 11:20 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
r00tuuu123 said: ....
Hmm It sounds like a wife married to a redneck that gets beat for running out of beer and says fuck off I 'dont need you. 
What does that even mean?
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
...
Seeing as they were revolting against a tyrannical government, I'd be so blunt as to say you're full of shit and that you're the one "clearly biased by today's crazy political ramblings to the point where you don't understand the founders' motivations for actually forming a government that may one day become tyrannical."
But hey... enjoy your obtuseness.
Again dude, you're missing the big picture. What you're talking about was important to them, but there's no sense in preserving freedom if you don't have a functional military to do it. Remember, there were no telecommincations or cars when the constitution was written. States couldn't quickly communicate needs or news of attacks between each other, and it was vital that everybody be able to defend themselves from attack, especially since they had just started a war with a world power. A village needed a militia because it couldn't call for help. Help wouldn't arrive for days, and an army would take even longer to get there. No militias meant an easy conquest for foreign enemies. A distant future threat from possible tyranny from themselves was not the major focus of the second amendment.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: koods]
#21936867 - 07/13/15 11:21 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: The founders solution for a tyrannical government was not the second amendment, it was Article I, II and III of the constitution which set up an elected president, elected members of the house, appointed senators, and a unelected judiciary.
It was all of those, including the Second Amendment.
The writings of the founders are numerous and clear. You need merely open your eyes and read them.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21936868 - 07/13/15 11:22 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: Again dude, you're missing the big picture.
Again dude, I'm not.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Sophistic Radiance
Free sVs!


Registered: 07/11/06
Posts: 43,135
Loc: Center of the Universe
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21936873 - 07/13/15 11:24 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I think it's funny when the views of "the founders" are elevated to messianic importance, the same way that Muslims see hadiths.
-------------------- Enlil said: You really are the worst kind of person.
|
r00tuuu123
Now I'm just really piseed



Registered: 04/20/12
Posts: 8,507
Loc: I'll be there in a minute
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
|
Quote:
BlindSophist said: It should be more strict than it is now.
WTF If anything it should be loosened. When people who are trained to see their country men it is nothing more then declaring us "enemy combatants" and stripping our rights from us. Are you people that big of go along get along pussys? Is going to that next festie that important? I am digusted by the lot of you!
--------------------
Please report me to a Mod for hurting your punk ass hippie feelings And all time Champion thread killer.
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
#21936881 - 07/13/15 11:27 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: Again dude, you're missing the big picture.
Again dude, I'm not.
How about a counter argument or a clarification of what you disagree with then? All you've done to try to support your argument is post a few quotes out of context and call me obtuse.
|
r00tuuu123
Now I'm just really piseed



Registered: 04/20/12
Posts: 8,507
Loc: I'll be there in a minute
Last seen: 7 years, 10 months
|
|
Quote:
BlindSophist said: I think it's funny when the views of "the founders" are elevated to messianic importance, the same way that Muslims see hadiths.
How so? Muhamed had some pretty good Ideas as did Our founding fathers. To blame the men who gave the guidelines is wrong?
--------------------
Please report me to a Mod for hurting your punk ass hippie feelings And all time Champion thread killer.
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: r00tuuu123]
#21936898 - 07/13/15 11:31 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlindSophist said: I think it's funny when the views of "the founders" are elevated to messianic importance, the same way that Muslims see hadiths.
It's funny in a sad way. Those founders should have put a couple amendments in to better public education if they were really so afraid of tyranny. Ignorant people need strong idols to worship.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
Quote:
BlindSophist said: I think it's funny when the views of "the founders" are elevated to messianic importance, the same way that Muslims see hadiths.
Seeing as they wrote the document... why would their views not matter more than most who couldn't even pass a civics or citizenship exam?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Sophistic Radiance
Free sVs!


Registered: 07/11/06
Posts: 43,135
Loc: Center of the Universe
|
Re: Guns control, where do you stand? [Re: r00tuuu123]
#21936908 - 07/13/15 11:33 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
r00tuuu123 said:
Quote:
BlindSophist said: I think it's funny when the views of "the founders" are elevated to messianic importance, the same way that Muslims see hadiths.
How so? Muhamed had some pretty good Ideas as did Our founding fathers. To blame the men who gave the guidelines is wrong?
Good ideas or no, he was a bigamy-practicing desert warlord whose wisdom was limited by his age. Just like the writers of the Constitution were slave owning white supremacists. That doesn't mean they can't have good ideas but they're not divine and their thoughts were never perfect. Their ideas should be subject to criticism.
Another thing that is funny about the breathless way religious nationalists speak of "the founders" is the fact that they were all really different often had wildly contradicting ideas of how the country should be run and what sort of country it should be. They probably agreed more about the justness of owning slaves and keeping the vote away from women than they did about, say, gun ownership.
-------------------- Enlil said: You really are the worst kind of person.
|
|