Obviosly the North Hollywood shootout ISN"T on you tube..........lol.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Wrong again. Even if a military did make it past ours I would absolutley love to see them try and roll through the streets of Compton. They are better armed than some National Guard units.Bubbalo wrote:
The big issue, though, is the gap between the capabilities of the armies. The gap between the British and Americans wasn't huge: both had about the same level of technology, the British had superior training, but the Americans probably had better morale/were more willing to fight. The difference between civilians and the US military is huge (unless you've got tanks that you haven't told me about).
Poll
If you could have only one Which one Would you Choose?
| Freedom of Speech | 73% | 73% - 198 | ||||
| Right to Bear Arms | 26% | 26% - 72 | ||||
| Total: 270 | ||||||
"I doubt anyone would die to keep a gun" - I believe the point is that you own the gun so you don't have to...
It's very simple: When we say "freedom of speech" what we're really saying is that we want the right to keep the government from dicking us around by pointing out their transgressions.
We don't want the government to be able to raid our checking accounts and then keep us quiet about it. We don't want them to have the ability to condemn our homes without knowing that we can affect change by letting others know about it. We don't want to be thrown in prison and know that our loved ones don't have the right to protest it in the streets if it is unjust.
We don't want to be oppressed...
Well gang, let me tell you that a million people can stand in the street and cry "don't oppress us" to a Capitol building guarded by 1,000 soliders with guns, and they aren't nearly as likely to be heard as 10,000 people chambering rounds.
Without the right to bear arms, the right to complain is meaningless. You need both, but make no mistake, without the ability to enforce your will the abililty to eloquently state your case is meaningless.
Give good men pens and they can not stand against evil men who hold guns, but give good men guns and they can stand against evil men who carry pens.
It's very simple: When we say "freedom of speech" what we're really saying is that we want the right to keep the government from dicking us around by pointing out their transgressions.
We don't want the government to be able to raid our checking accounts and then keep us quiet about it. We don't want them to have the ability to condemn our homes without knowing that we can affect change by letting others know about it. We don't want to be thrown in prison and know that our loved ones don't have the right to protest it in the streets if it is unjust.
We don't want to be oppressed...
Well gang, let me tell you that a million people can stand in the street and cry "don't oppress us" to a Capitol building guarded by 1,000 soliders with guns, and they aren't nearly as likely to be heard as 10,000 people chambering rounds.
Without the right to bear arms, the right to complain is meaningless. You need both, but make no mistake, without the ability to enforce your will the abililty to eloquently state your case is meaningless.
Give good men pens and they can not stand against evil men who hold guns, but give good men guns and they can stand against evil men who carry pens.
Beyond the level of civil war, a good man with a pen can't legislate, protest or lawyer his way out of the 'unlikely occurance' of a violent encounter quite as easily as a good man with a gun. It is for this reason more than going up against Nazis in tanks with my 9mm that I keep weapons around.Dersmikner wrote:
Give good men pens and they can not stand against evil men who hold guns, but give good men guns and they can stand against evil men who carry pens.
Plinking at black helicopters with a 12-gauge is no realistic way to wage civil war...unless you can somehow confuse them into crashing, as is possible in BF2.
But indirectly so. Words, like guns, can fail. If I point my finger at someone and say 'bang,' they're not going to fall over, wounded or killed. Unless they're totally gullible. Or a six-year-old boy (even then, he might say that you missed).eyesteponbabies wrote:
Words are more powerful than any gun.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-11-14 20:41:05)
Words are more powerful than any gun.
Physically or mentally?eyesteponbabies wrote:
Words are more powerful than any gun.
Mentally.
There's good reason the 2nd amendment in our Constitution immediately follows the first...that is the order in which we have and then keep our rights. One cannot exist without the other.
Two conversations:
(with no right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, you just jacked up our taxes to 95%...I can't feed my family!"
"So what?"..."Off with his head!"
(with right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, thank you for keeping our taxes reasonable."
"Hehe, yeah...ummm...you're welcome."
Two conversations:
(with no right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, you just jacked up our taxes to 95%...I can't feed my family!"
"So what?"..."Off with his head!"
(with right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, thank you for keeping our taxes reasonable."
"Hehe, yeah...ummm...you're welcome."
OMG. Your politicians must be a piece of shit if you need a weapon to make them get their job done.GorillaTicTacs wrote:
There's good reason the 2nd amendment in our Constitution immediately follows the first...that is the order in which we have and then keep our rights. One cannot exist without the other.
Two conversations:
(with no right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, you just jacked up our taxes to 95%...I can't feed my family!"
"So what?"..."Off with his head!"
(with right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, thank you for keeping our taxes reasonable."
"Hehe, yeah...ummm...you're welcome."
Compare the corruption indexes for every country to the USA...we don't even break the top 20 least corrupt. Without the far, far, far distant threat of another civil war, in which every politician since Truman has attempted to put policies in place to prevent, corruption in the USA would be FAR worse than it already is.OMG. Your politicians must be a piece of shit if you need a weapon to make them get their job done.
In the old West, they called revolvers "equalizers" for a reason. Essentially, with a gun in hand walking up to any unprepared man, every man was then equally able to kill anyone else. While it would be nice to say that we are so much more "civilized" than that, human nature says differently. Power grows from the barrel of a gun...if everyone is armed, people need to figure out different ways to settle things then.
Well as only 40-50% of Americans vote and 40%ish of Americans have guns, if you end up with a government that opress you it's you own fault. Put the guns down and remember to vote for someone who isn't a tyrannical dictator. Freedom of speach wins.Dersmikner wrote:
"I doubt anyone would die to keep a gun" - I believe the point is that you own the gun so you don't have to...
It's very simple: When we say "freedom of speech" what we're really saying is that we want the right to keep the government from dicking us around by pointing out their transgressions.
We don't want the government to be able to raid our checking accounts and then keep us quiet about it. We don't want them to have the ability to condemn our homes without knowing that we can affect change by letting others know about it. We don't want to be thrown in prison and know that our loved ones don't have the right to protest it in the streets if it is unjust.
We don't want to be oppressed...
Well gang, let me tell you that a million people can stand in the street and cry "don't oppress us" to a Capitol building guarded by 1,000 soliders with guns, and they aren't nearly as likely to be heard as 10,000 people chambering rounds.
Without the right to bear arms, the right to complain is meaningless. You need both, but make no mistake, without the ability to enforce your will the abililty to eloquently state your case is meaningless.
Give good men pens and they can not stand against evil men who hold guns, but give good men guns and they can stand against evil men who carry pens.
There are real problems with using guns to enforce freedom of speach. If the majority of the US decided they wanted to get rid of the guns, then the remaining minority will supposedly use their guns to rise up against the democratic decision you end up with the situation where the guns are actually the CAUSE of the oppression, not the solution to it.
If a minority group can enforce their politics on the majority by use of force, then that isn't a democracy you've got there......
I don't get why everyone should have the right to own and carry guns. If in my region this would be allowed i needed to get one as well because everyone could have one so more need to protect myself.
I'm glad i dont have the right to bear arms, there's too many lunatics arround.
I'm glad i dont have the right to bear arms, there's too many lunatics arround.
I am all for freedom of speech but there needs to be a common ground that you just don't cross : is this what we need
Everyday my freedom to bear arms is infringed and we have to fight to keep it alive :
theres guys like this out there :
theres sports like this out there :
Everyday my freedom to bear arms is infringed and we have to fight to keep it alive :
theres guys like this out there :
theres sports like this out there :
Last edited by SEREMAKER (2006-11-16 08:40:32)
Here's the last word on this in terms of the western world:
This is a distinctly AMERICAN problem that thankfully we in the rest of the world don't have to deal with. It's too late for America now - they started off on the wrong foot and rolling back on the right to bear arms is IMPOSSIBLE. Let's just give thanks for the fact we don't have to deal with what appears to amount to a culture of fear that unfortunate Americans have to put up with compelling them to bear arms.
This is a distinctly AMERICAN problem that thankfully we in the rest of the world don't have to deal with. It's too late for America now - they started off on the wrong foot and rolling back on the right to bear arms is IMPOSSIBLE. Let's just give thanks for the fact we don't have to deal with what appears to amount to a culture of fear that unfortunate Americans have to put up with compelling them to bear arms.
For the 1,000th time: it's not fear, it's common sense preparation. I don't own a gun only for home protection, I also enjoy target shooting and hunting. That doesn't involve any fear, but does involve owning guns - something any non-felon should be able to do. I own my shotgun because I like to hunt and I own my pistol because I like to target shoot. Both function well for home protection if I need it. In my town, I'm not worried, but my guns are there the need arises. It seems you envision us as huddled in the corner with our guns pointed at the door each and every night.CameronPoe wrote:
Here's the last word on this in terms of the western world:
This is a distinctly AMERICAN problem that thankfully we in the rest of the world don't have to deal with. It's too late for America now - they started off on the wrong foot and rolling back on the right to bear arms is IMPOSSIBLE. Let's just give thanks for the fact we don't have to deal with what appears to amount to a culture of fear that unfortunate Americans have to put up with compelling them to bear arms.
Last edited by Stingray24 (2006-11-16 08:59:13)
Oh, I see. Having a gun makes you imortal...Dersmikner wrote:
"I doubt anyone would die to keep a gun" - I believe the point is that you own the gun so you don't have to...
10,000 people chambering rounds in front of a government bulding is a revolution, which will rightly justify the government using the army against you. If your government is opressing you, thats all ther excuse they need to roll the tanks over you. So much for having weapons at home...Dersmikner wrote:
We don't want to be oppressed...
Well gang, let me tell you that a million people can stand in the street and cry "don't oppress us" to a Capitol building guarded by 1,000 soliders with guns, and they aren't nearly as likely to be heard as 10,000 people chambering rounds.
So you can only have your government listlen to you by threathing it? That dosen't sound like a functioning democracy to me...Dersmikner wrote:
Without the right to bear arms, the right to complain is meaningless. You need both, but make no mistake, without the ability to enforce your will the abililty to eloquently state your case is meaningless.
Leaders, like your Martin Luther King, changed your society without ever firing a shot. His words changed your society and history, and no gun can kill that.Dersmikner wrote:
Give good men pens and they can not stand against evil men who hold guns, but give good men guns and they can stand against evil men who carry pens.
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
//insert
...picture of man with bear arms...
I couldn't find one anywhere and I'm at work so I can't chop anything up.
...picture of man with bear arms...
I couldn't find one anywhere and I'm at work so I can't chop anything up.
Ok, that's you. But a lot of people here said the guns prevent government oppression and shitty politicians to do whatever they want. When you need a gun for protection, there's fear involved.Stingray24 wrote:
For the 1,000th time: it's not fear, it's common sense preparation. I don't own a gun only for home protection, I also enjoy target shooting and hunting. That doesn't involve any fear, but does involve owning guns - something any non-felon should be able to do. I own my shotgun because I like to hunt and I own my pistol because I like to target shoot. Both function well for home protection if I need it. In my town, I'm not worried, but my guns are there the need arises. It seems you envision us as huddled in the corner with our guns pointed at the door each and every night.CameronPoe wrote:
Here's the last word on this in terms of the western world:
This is a distinctly AMERICAN problem that thankfully we in the rest of the world don't have to deal with. It's too late for America now - they started off on the wrong foot and rolling back on the right to bear arms is IMPOSSIBLE. Let's just give thanks for the fact we don't have to deal with what appears to amount to a culture of fear that unfortunate Americans have to put up with compelling them to bear arms.
People that think we need guns to protect ourselves from our government are quacks. What we need are citizens that can elect the right people to office.sergeriver wrote:
Ok, that's you. But a lot of people here said the guns prevent government oppression and shitty politicians to do whatever they want. When you need a gun for protection, there's fear involved.Stingray24 wrote:
For the 1,000th time: it's not fear, it's common sense preparation. I don't own a gun only for home protection, I also enjoy target shooting and hunting. That doesn't involve any fear, but does involve owning guns - something any non-felon should be able to do. I own my shotgun because I like to hunt and I own my pistol because I like to target shoot. Both function well for home protection if I need it. In my town, I'm not worried, but my guns are there the need arises. It seems you envision us as huddled in the corner with our guns pointed at the door each and every night.CameronPoe wrote:
Here's the last word on this in terms of the western world:
This is a distinctly AMERICAN problem that thankfully we in the rest of the world don't have to deal with. It's too late for America now - they started off on the wrong foot and rolling back on the right to bear arms is IMPOSSIBLE. Let's just give thanks for the fact we don't have to deal with what appears to amount to a culture of fear that unfortunate Americans have to put up with compelling them to bear arms.
And I don't see fear as a motivation to have a gun. People have guns to protect their homes and families. You may say fear binds them to that weapon because in a time of fear, we'll use it. But, we use it protecting our families not out of fear (fear that something will happen to them), but out of aggression to show those fucking cunts that break into our homes that they fucked with the wrong mother fucker... fuckers.
i love all the people that dont live in the US that feel our way of life is out of control in regards to firearm possession.
it hasd been proven time and again that the govt and local law enforcement dont have the capabilities to protect you.
it is fact and it is also proven in statistic that everywhere the freedom to own and maintain a frearm is taken from the public, crime increases.
common snse ( which you gun haters dont have ) say that you take away guns from citizens and what you have is a society of armed crimianls. criminals are not going to turn their guns in.
A s for which freedom is more important... we could debate this till the end of time but it comes down to this statement: without the second amendment and the FREEDOM to bear arms, we wouldnt have anyother freedoms.
the second amendment protects all other freedoms from being taken from us.
and if you live in fantasy land and dont think that our own govt will not remove all freedoms from us, then you are an idiot and dont pay attention to anything.
our govt , as greta as it is(best in world), feels its citizens are incapable of handling themselves. them woulfd rather control all that takes place then think we could do it ourselves.
WITHOUT THE GOVT FEARING REPRISAL FROM SCORNED (ARMED) CITIZENS, THERE WOULD BE NO CHECKS AND BALANCES IN THIS COUNTYR AND THEN YOU WOULD BE SUTRALIAL OR ENGLAND. that is where the govt continues to prove that only they know what is best for its citizens.
REMEMBER , YOU WOULDNT HAVE ANYOTHER FREEDOMS WITHOUT THE FREEDOM OF HAIVING GUNS AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT WHICH WAS CLEARLY WRIITEN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND NOT MILITRY FREEDOM.
it hasd been proven time and again that the govt and local law enforcement dont have the capabilities to protect you.
it is fact and it is also proven in statistic that everywhere the freedom to own and maintain a frearm is taken from the public, crime increases.
common snse ( which you gun haters dont have ) say that you take away guns from citizens and what you have is a society of armed crimianls. criminals are not going to turn their guns in.
A s for which freedom is more important... we could debate this till the end of time but it comes down to this statement: without the second amendment and the FREEDOM to bear arms, we wouldnt have anyother freedoms.
the second amendment protects all other freedoms from being taken from us.
and if you live in fantasy land and dont think that our own govt will not remove all freedoms from us, then you are an idiot and dont pay attention to anything.
our govt , as greta as it is(best in world), feels its citizens are incapable of handling themselves. them woulfd rather control all that takes place then think we could do it ourselves.
WITHOUT THE GOVT FEARING REPRISAL FROM SCORNED (ARMED) CITIZENS, THERE WOULD BE NO CHECKS AND BALANCES IN THIS COUNTYR AND THEN YOU WOULD BE SUTRALIAL OR ENGLAND. that is where the govt continues to prove that only they know what is best for its citizens.
REMEMBER , YOU WOULDNT HAVE ANYOTHER FREEDOMS WITHOUT THE FREEDOM OF HAIVING GUNS AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT WHICH WAS CLEARLY WRIITEN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND NOT MILITRY FREEDOM.
So, the best government in the World fears reprisal from armed citizens and that's why it does the right thing. IMO that doesn't sound as a good government. If you need to be protected by a gun against criminals you need a better police. If you need a gun to protect you from your government you need a better one.badshot wrote:
i love all the people that dont live in the US that feel our way of life is out of control in regards to firearm possession.
it hasd been proven time and again that the govt and local law enforcement dont have the capabilities to protect you.
it is fact and it is also proven in statistic that everywhere the freedom to own and maintain a frearm is taken from the public, crime increases.
common snse ( which you gun haters dont have ) say that you take away guns from citizens and what you have is a society of armed crimianls. criminals are not going to turn their guns in.
A s for which freedom is more important... we could debate this till the end of time but it comes down to this statement: without the second amendment and the FREEDOM to bear arms, we wouldnt have anyother freedoms.
the second amendment protects all other freedoms from being taken from us.
and if you live in fantasy land and dont think that our own govt will not remove all freedoms from us, then you are an idiot and dont pay attention to anything.
our govt , as greta as it is(best in world), feels its citizens are incapable of handling themselves. them woulfd rather control all that takes place then think we could do it ourselves.
WITHOUT THE GOVT FEARING REPRISAL FROM SCORNED (ARMED) CITIZENS, THERE WOULD BE NO CHECKS AND BALANCES IN THIS COUNTYR AND THEN YOU WOULD BE SUTRALIAL OR ENGLAND. that is where the govt continues to prove that only they know what is best for its citizens.
REMEMBER , YOU WOULDNT HAVE ANYOTHER FREEDOMS WITHOUT THE FREEDOM OF HAIVING GUNS AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT WHICH WAS CLEARLY WRIITEN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND NOT MILITRY FREEDOM.
Wrong, its the other way around. When there's no way to settle things is when people turn to gun-barrels and other forms of violence.GorillaTicTacs wrote:
Compare the corruption indexes for every country to the USA...we don't even break the top 20 least corrupt. Without the far, far, far distant threat of another civil war, in which every politician since Truman has attempted to put policies in place to prevent, corruption in the USA would be FAR worse than it already is.OMG. Your politicians must be a piece of shit if you need a weapon to make them get their job done.
In the old West, they called revolvers "equalizers" for a reason. Essentially, with a gun in hand walking up to any unprepared man, every man was then equally able to kill anyone else. While it would be nice to say that we are so much more "civilized" than that, human nature says differently. Power grows from the barrel of a gun...if everyone is armed, people need to figure out different ways to settle things then.
America seems to have decent law-enforcement system, why do still need "equalizers"? The old west is long gone, FFS...
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
No one will hear anyone through the roar of gunfire.Dersmikner wrote:
Well gang, let me tell you that a million people can stand in the street and cry "don't oppress us" to a Capitol building guarded by 1,000 soliders with guns, and they aren't nearly as likely to be heard as 10,000 people chambering rounds.
1,000 soldiers with the same level of weaponry as the crowd perhaps... but 1,000 soldiers with tanks, planes and choppers, verses even 1,000,000 citizens with small arms? Spawn rape anyone?jonsimon wrote:
No one will hear anyone through the roar of gunfire.Dersmikner wrote:
Well gang, let me tell you that a million people can stand in the street and cry "don't oppress us" to a Capitol building guarded by 1,000 soliders with guns, and they aren't nearly as likely to be heard as 10,000 people chambering rounds.
That brings back some made memeries from my Karkand whoring days, no way to escape the BTR-90, no way to destroy it because there are two engineers behind it.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
1,000 soldiers with the same level of weaponry as the crowd perhaps... but 1,000 soldiers with tanks, planes and choppers, verses even 1,000,000 citizens with small arms? Spawn rape anyone?jonsimon wrote:
No one will hear anyone through the roar of gunfire.Dersmikner wrote:
Well gang, let me tell you that a million people can stand in the street and cry "don't oppress us" to a Capitol building guarded by 1,000 soliders with guns, and they aren't nearly as likely to be heard as 10,000 people chambering rounds.
Politricks are universal, they're not exclusive to the U.S. Come on now, there's plenty of history books to teach you that.sergeriver wrote:
OMG. Your politicians must be a piece of shit if you need a weapon to make them get their job done.GorillaTicTacs wrote:
There's good reason the 2nd amendment in our Constitution immediately follows the first...that is the order in which we have and then keep our rights. One cannot exist without the other.
Two conversations:
(with no right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, you just jacked up our taxes to 95%...I can't feed my family!"
"So what?"..."Off with his head!"
(with right to bear arms)
"Hey, Mr. Politician, thank you for keeping our taxes reasonable."
"Hehe, yeah...ummm...you're welcome."
It's not OUR fear of government, it's making sure the government fears US. Do you really think having your government fearful of abusing you is a bad thing? It's absolutely essential to the balance of power, and keeping it in the hands of the people.sergeriver wrote:
Ok, that's you. But a lot of people here said the guns prevent government oppression and shitty politicians to do whatever they want. When you need a gun for protection, there's fear involved.Stingray24 wrote:
For the 1,000th time: it's not fear, it's common sense preparation. I don't own a gun only for home protection, I also enjoy target shooting and hunting. That doesn't involve any fear, but does involve owning guns - something any non-felon should be able to do. I own my shotgun because I like to hunt and I own my pistol because I like to target shoot. Both function well for home protection if I need it. In my town, I'm not worried, but my guns are there the need arises. It seems you envision us as huddled in the corner with our guns pointed at the door each and every night.CameronPoe wrote:
Here's the last word on this in terms of the western world:
This is a distinctly AMERICAN problem that thankfully we in the rest of the world don't have to deal with. It's too late for America now - they started off on the wrong foot and rolling back on the right to bear arms is IMPOSSIBLE. Let's just give thanks for the fact we don't have to deal with what appears to amount to a culture of fear that unfortunate Americans have to put up with compelling them to bear arms.