stop bringing up the founding fathers in gun arguments

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by hatelore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Haha, this ^ coming from hatelores. One of the biggest mental midgets this forum has to offer(sic) to offer to the general public lol [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Please prove me wrong some time. If you can? The only thing you seem capable of is name-calling while you flounder for understanding.

[Tarathiel]

Originally Posted by Portsche [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

psh i cant be bothered with such conveniences, i post first proof read later, its how i keep my rage honed

[Tarathiel]

Originally Posted by Tarathiel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

how come black people couldnt own guns back then? was thomas jefferson afraid his slaves might revolt against him?

[OforOppression]

they were too concerned about giving freedom to middle and upper class white males

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not defending automatic weaponry. Like I said, the specifics are open for discussion. I'm speaking in generalities -- the right to bear arms. The right to own a gun. I'm not breaking down what types of guns, in particular. That's a different debate.

But aside from that, it's not really evidence of anything that one country has managed to avoid catastrophic tyranny for 16 years without an armed populace. Tyranny isn't an inevitability with an unarmed populace, and certainly not within a timeframe of a decade or two. It's merely a possibility, which is too much for some.

I'd also quibble with the notion that this is a matter of possible future issues vs. present day issues. Many people would disagree that there is an issue in America. Committing a violent act with a gun is illegal. Violators are prosecuted. Law abiding citizens are free to own firearms. To many, that is perfectly acceptable and the fact that murder rates are higher in the United States is an unfortunate side effect of greater degrees of liberty. Many Americans would see it as a bigger issue that citizens of other countries are legally incapable of defending themselves -- whether from crime or government.

/best in thread

Some thoughts:

The two greatest expansions of personal liberty in American history, the abolition of slavery and desegregation, were enforced by the armed forces, over the objections of state governments and in the face of violence by certain armed citizens fond of gray uniforms or white hoods.

As long as we are writing science fiction, in the event that a Hitler, Stalin or Mao seized control in Washington, D.C., this American tyrant would worry far more about being murdered by the praetorian guard or overthrown by the military than about the near-impossibility of defeat of the U.S. armed forces by ordinary armed citizens, particularly the kind of pathetic right-wing militia members who would have trouble taking over a trailer park.

Many democratic nations of western Europe and east Asia have more civil liberties protections for their citizens than the U.S., and few have political systems as corrupted by gerrymandering and big money as the U.S. (Italy is a prominent exception). No other advanced industrial democracy is in imminent danger of becoming a tyranny because of gun control regulations and the lack of an American-style gun culture among Brits or Swedes or Japanese.


Last but not least...


BAN BOOBIES BECAUSE THEY'RE MURDER WEAPONS

Can't believe I missed this whole troll thread.

[patriot1776]

Originally Posted by Tarathiel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

how come black people couldnt own guns back then? was thomas jefferson afraid his slaves might revolt against him?

Originally Posted by patriot1776 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Throughout history only slaves have been disarmed.

[Humerox]

I think you missed the subtlety behind the subtlety.

Or...that TJ was actually a representative of tyranny and feared revolt from armed slaves.

You know, the same freedom-loving FF's we're all so crazy about.

[patriot1776]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Tarathiel]

is that supposed to be some kind of justification?

[Humerox]

No...I missed the innuendo in your reply to it...
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]