Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

This is why Gun Control is Contentious

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Originally posted by AcerTempest View Post
    For many on this forum, it is the right of self defense, which if one lives in America is almost entirely predicated on the right to individually own a firearm because we have an armed career criminal class in our country that makes it socially and logistically impossible to ACTUALLY disarm the bad guys while leaving the good guys their weapons.
    This is really well stated.

    I might steal it at some point in the future.
    Shut the hell up and train.

    Comment


      #47
      Originally posted by jnp View Post
      This is really well stated.

      I might steal it at some point in the future.
      Take it with my blessing.
      I only wish more people would put ACTUAL thought in to this stuff before they go off in to an emotionally charged nightmare that winds up creating problems for other people.

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by Mr. Machette View Post
        No but I use violent force in self defense scenarios often.

        So if you think you've some point to prove then get in line.

        But we've already established that you are a coward who relies on others the to do violence on your behalf. So I'm not terribly concerned. Chicken shit.
        Everyone kind of relies on others to do violence on their behalf though. Some people pretend that being a badass stops them getting mugged. Some people accept that living in a first world country with laws and stuff plays a role as well.
        Whitsunday Martial Arts Airlie Beach North Queensland.
        http://www.facebook.com/#!/WhitsundayMartialArts

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by jnp View Post
          This is really well stated.

          I might steal it at some point in the future.
          Is it true though?

          So say we look at registration and training. It would endow good gun owners with more rights than bad. Yes criminals could still break the law but police could also catch them and lock them up. It makes using a gun harder for a criminal act than a non criminal one.

          Which is kind of how laws are supposed to work.
          Whitsunday Martial Arts Airlie Beach North Queensland.
          http://www.facebook.com/#!/WhitsundayMartialArts

          Comment


            #50
            Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
            Everyone kind of relies on others to do violence on their behalf though. Some people pretend that being a badass stops them getting mugged. Some people accept that living in a first world country with laws and stuff plays a role as well.
            I'll disagree. Criminals don't give a happy rat's arse about laws. Police are limited in response time.

            Be it sock drawer, gun cabinet or the closet by the front door, if you have an assault upon you, it is in that time that you'd better have a response. Duck and hide if possible or blow the intruders out the door. First world countries and laws help little when it's just you and the ones that'd have you as prey. Second and third world more so.
            Carter Hargrave's Jeet Can't Do

            http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=31636

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by AcerTempest View Post
              Now YOU'RE being an idiot. Don't imitate Ghost.
              Natural rights are of course a fiction, but a necessary one. If we do not acknowledge some human rights as transcending any individual governments or even collection of governments authority to trample, then we must kneel before and acknowledge the authority and even moral superiority of governments. This is a far more dangerous, immoral and unhealthy thing to do than a small fiction about the natural order of things.
              The philosopher Heinlein put it best I think: What "Right to life" has a man drowning in the ocean? The ocean will not hear his calls or pleas for mercy.
              Yet, again, returning to my previous point about us living in a society, in order to more peacefully live with one another, we must acknowledge certain truths about humanity and certain rights that must not be morally ceded to any particular government or group.
              And by extension, assuming you care about living in a society where your government has SOME sort of moral authority and mandate from the people, you also cannot LEGALLY cede these rights either.
              Now, where the tricky bit of my philosophizing comes is this: Which rights are that important to YOU? What would make YOU willing to hoist black flags and start slitting throats or bomb the GPO?
              For many on this forum, it is the right of self defense, which if one lives in America is almost entirely predicated on the right to individually own a firearm because we have an armed career criminal class in our country that makes it socially and logistically impossible to ACTUALLY disarm the bad guys while leaving the good guys their weapons.
              Additionally, our government, like all others, has at times crossed lines and trampled the rights of individuals and small groups.
              When those groups were ARMED and prepared to resist though, it at least makes them hesitate, and can give time for other means, more related to the 1st amendment, to be effective.
              Now obviously this is not the case for you.
              But again, I bring it back to my earlier question. What right WOULD you kill and die and burn the world to protect?
              Shit dude did I drunkenly piss in your cereal or something?

              Comment


                #52
                Originally posted by anthracite View Post
                I'll disagree. Criminals don't give a happy rat's arse about laws. Police are limited in response time.

                Be it sock drawer, gun cabinet or the closet by the front door, if you have an assault upon you, it is in that time that you'd better have a response. Duck and hide if possible or blow the intruders out the door. First world countries and laws help little when it's just you and the ones that'd have you as prey. Second and third world more so.
                I suppose using an extreme version a person who litters will also just as likely commit mass murder.?

                Because crime is crime.

                It seems a bit blown out of proportion to think I am walking through the wild west with just my amazing self defense skills. Admittedly I don't do RBSD anymore so I have calmed down a bit.

                Living the Krav life.

                https://youtu.be/2uc44atkviU
                Last edited by gregaquaman; 12/14/2019 5:08pm, .
                Whitsunday Martial Arts Airlie Beach North Queensland.
                http://www.facebook.com/#!/WhitsundayMartialArts

                Comment


                  #53
                  As of last month, we here in Oklahoma are not required to have a carry permit to carry. USA!
                  Carter Hargrave's Jeet Can't Do

                  http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=31636

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
                    Everyone kind of relies on others to do violence on their behalf though. Some people pretend that being a badass stops them getting mugged. Some people accept that living in a first world country with laws and stuff plays a role as well.
                    Speak for yourself.

                    If somebody comes on my property,

                    I am the first responder,

                    My neighbors, armed, the second responders,

                    And when the Sheriffs deputies get here, they get here,

                    and find the situation well in hand when they do.

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
                      Is it true though?

                      So say we look at registration and training. It would endow good gun owners with more rights than bad. Yes criminals could still break the law but police could also catch them and lock them up. It makes using a gun harder for a criminal act than a non criminal one.

                      Which is kind of how laws are supposed to work.
                      You sound pretty dumb.

                      I do not reject you.

                      But you sound dumb just the same.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Originally posted by AcerTempest View Post
                        Now YOU'RE being an idiot. Don't imitate Ghost.
                        Natural rights are of course a fiction, but a necessary one. If we do not acknowledge some human rights as transcending any individual governments or even collection of governments authority to trample, then we must kneel before and acknowledge the authority and even moral superiority of governments. This is a far more dangerous, immoral and unhealthy thing to do than a small fiction about the natural order of things.
                        The philosopher Heinlein put it best I think: What "Right to life" has a man drowning in the ocean? The ocean will not hear his calls or pleas for mercy.
                        Yet, again, returning to my previous point about us living in a society, in order to more peacefully live with one another, we must acknowledge certain truths about humanity and certain rights that must not be morally ceded to any particular government or group.
                        And by extension, assuming you care about living in a society where your government has SOME sort of moral authority and mandate from the people, you also cannot LEGALLY cede these rights either.
                        Now, where the tricky bit of my philosophizing comes is this: Which rights are that important to YOU? What would make YOU willing to hoist black flags and start slitting throats or bomb the GPO?
                        For many on this forum, it is the right of self defense, which if one lives in America is almost entirely predicated on the right to individually own a firearm because we have an armed career criminal class in our country that makes it socially and logistically impossible to ACTUALLY disarm the bad guys while leaving the good guys their weapons.
                        Additionally, our government, like all others, has at times crossed lines and trampled the rights of individuals and small groups.
                        When those groups were ARMED and prepared to resist though, it at least makes them hesitate, and can give time for other means, more related to the 1st amendment, to be effective.
                        Now obviously this is not the case for you.
                        But again, I bring it back to my earlier question. What right WOULD you kill and die and burn the world to protect?
                        This a fine rant, but I don’t understand what the last part has to do with what I said? Where did I claim you didn’t have a right to a gun or to protect yourself?

                        I’m saying nature is not the one endowing you with the rights, human agency is; through a collective moral agreement. Which you agreed with but then said I’m being an idiot for saying so... so we’re both being idiots then? A useful delusion is still a delusion and I have no obligation to participate in it and by the nature of delusions; they are not true, so I don’t have to acknowledge it either.

                        I feel like your trying to make me some kind of villain by inferring some kind of malice based on a false dichotomy that you have adopted.
                        Last edited by lant3rn; 12/14/2019 7:19pm, .

                        Comment


                          #57
                          See preamble of the Declaration of Independence.
                          Carter Hargrave's Jeet Can't Do

                          http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=31636

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Originally posted by anthracite View Post
                            See preamble of the Declaration of Independence.
                            Originally posted by Declaration of independence
                            We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed through their fellowship with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security
                            John Adams was a visionary poet, I and hope he is not cursing me from the grave... but I'm not sure if my small alteration really changes his eloquent rebuke of tyranny.

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Originally posted by lant3rn View Post
                              John Adams was a visionary poet, I and hope he is not cursing me from the grave... but I'm not sure if my small alteration really changes his eloquent rebuke of tyranny.
                              John Adams,

                              Unlike Thomas Jefferson,

                              Was not just a poet,

                              But was a real world player with great execution.

                              I remain a fan of John Adams.

                              And, outside of his prose, a critic of Thomas Jefferson.

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Originally posted by lant3rn View Post
                                John Adams was a visionary poet, I and hope he is not cursing me from the grave... but I'm not sure if my small alteration really changes his eloquent rebuke of tyranny.
                                They don't write like that anymore. I don't think John would take umbrage with your change. Many of the founders were deists or possibly agnostics. One had to watch what one wrote or said, even in that time of enlightenment.
                                Carter Hargrave's Jeet Can't Do

                                http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=31636

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X