No, it means the fact that you can do/have something doesn't mean you will do have something. The point wasn't relevant to the larger discussion anyway, it's just that since lowing was being a dipshit I thought I'd respond in kind.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I find myself scratching my head, here. Does "for example, I have the right to dance, yet I choose not to," mean you'd accept said right being removed, because it doesn't affect you directly?Bubbalo wrote:
For example, I have the right to dance, yet I choose not to. And if we're going to get technical you are incorrect: the right to bear arms is the right to have weapons, not guns.
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 | ||||||
My dad has 3, and I still don't agree.lowing wrote:
yeah boy, we are all just running around shootin' up each other. BTW, I have 2 guns, a Remington 870 tactical shotgun (8 shots) and a Romanian built Ak-47.........semi auto onlysergeriver wrote:
Only because of the arms for everyone fest.Bubbalo wrote:
More to the point, if you choose note to have a car your not at risk of crashing it, if you choose not to have a gun you run just as much (if not more) risk of being shot.
I take the freedom of speech. I wouldn't even know what to do with the arms of a bear
I still can't believe 25% of the people voted for giving up their freedom of speech.
What good is freedom of speech, when there's nothing to ensure you can keep it? A government can do anything to a populace, including taking away their rights, when the populace can't defend themselves. The right to bear arms has more meaning behind it, then just whoring out firearms.
Freedom of speech, duuuh. I can't believe why anyone would vote contrary to that. I'm sorry, you don't NEED guns, but the freedom to voice my opinion without fear of persecution, yeah I do need that. I'm actually genuinely surpised people are arguing for freedom to bear arms.
Dec45, you must eb joking me. Your saying the populace must be able to defend themselves? Ok, lets take 1000 townspeople, with no formnal training, no military knowledge, BUT they get all the rifles they want. And lets pit them against 100 marines. Yup. That is pretty clear who's gonna win. They're definitly gonna be able to defend themselves and their rights! Secondly, what good is freedom of speech. How about this. I'm in power. I don't like your opinion. You are not allowed to talk. I delete your post and forbid you from speaking your mind. Oh, but you've got a gun? Well, I'm still in power, so I still control the military, meet my marines. Not talking now are yah?
Dec45, you must eb joking me. Your saying the populace must be able to defend themselves? Ok, lets take 1000 townspeople, with no formnal training, no military knowledge, BUT they get all the rifles they want. And lets pit them against 100 marines. Yup. That is pretty clear who's gonna win. They're definitly gonna be able to defend themselves and their rights! Secondly, what good is freedom of speech. How about this. I'm in power. I don't like your opinion. You are not allowed to talk. I delete your post and forbid you from speaking your mind. Oh, but you've got a gun? Well, I'm still in power, so I still control the military, meet my marines. Not talking now are yah?
Poor bears what did they ever do to you guys, and now you want to go around killing bears so you can have the right to bear arms. Think of the poor buggers they will have to learn to walk on their hind feet all the time now cos of you lot
Sure... If the conditions conveniently match your scenario... Truth of the matter is, there's nothing to protect your freedom of speech. America has freedom of speech, yet I can't even accurately describe the amount of censorship this country's government puts on its people. But because of our firearms, there is a limit to which we can be censored. You can choose to take everything for granted, but I think you need a lesson on revolution. If the populace has a right to bear arms, the government cannot afford revolt. Not only that, but you have to take into consideration that the military is made up of the populace. Your view is completely passive and in the hands of those in power from the beginning. Mine is aggressive, and in the hands of the people from the beginning. Let the people regulate the government, not the other way around. Because words my friend, don't regulate shit...AchangelTyreal wrote:
Freedom of speech, duuuh. I can't believe why anyone would vote contrary to that. I'm sorry, you don't NEED guns, but the freedom to voice my opinion without fear of persecution, yeah I do need that. I'm actually genuinely surpised people are arguing for freedom to bear arms.
Dec45, you must eb joking me. Your saying the populace must be able to defend themselves? Ok, lets take 1000 townspeople, with no formnal training, no military knowledge, BUT they get all the rifles they want. And lets pit them against 100 marines. Yup. That is pretty clear who's gonna win. They're definitly gonna be able to defend themselves and their rights! Secondly, what good is freedom of speech. How about this. I'm in power. I don't like your opinion. You are not allowed to talk. I delete your post and forbid you from speaking your mind. Oh, but you've got a gun? Well, I'm still in power, so I still control the military, meet my marines. Not talking now are yah?
Last edited by Dec45 (2006-11-11 07:35:23)
I think you misunderstood the context in which I used that quote. I was not saying that your question was poor, it's a very good question. I was using your original post to show Bubbalo what the real question in this topic was, since he goes off-topic constantly. You can read my other replies and you should be able to tell, I definitely AM thinking.sergeriver wrote:
You could start thinking yourself, it's a good exercise.Not wrote:
Can you please provide facts to support your claim that nobody in Britain is allowed to own a weapon?Bubbalo wrote:
How so? You have yet to prove your position. Britain has right to free speech but does not have right to bear arms.From the OP:Bubbalo wrote:
Maybe you should follow the discussion back to it's start before you declare who's being an idiot.Pretty simple question there isn't it? Which one would you choose? Did it say anything about specifying the already obvious in your argument? Please, your insanity is contagious. Stop thinking.sergeriver wrote:
If you could have only one, which one would you choose?
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin
Some of us don't feel the need to be obnoxious, loud, or controversial in everyone's face every day.sergeriver wrote:
I still can't believe 25% of the people voted for giving up their freedom of speech.
Let's examine "Freedom of Speech" shall we? Exactly what about this right is appealing to most people? The right to openly, publically criticize your government? We have that right now and look what it accomplishes. Nothing. This is because we have a voice, but nobody's listening to it. Watch Hannity and Colmes later this week. It's a great demonstration of how little your right to voice your opinion on government means when you stick two pigheaded egomaniacs against each other. It turns into nothing more than the D&ST section of these forums. People believe they know the only right way and they scream it at the top of their lungs, totally unable to accept anyone elses points of view, and often resorting to circular logic and off-topic quips to try to win listeners over to their side. Thankfully, this type of thing produces brainless followers who are completely unable to think about a situation outside of their own paradigm, and completely contradicting the point in the first place.
Tell me something, how is it that the OP made this post, with a poll, and chose one right he was so passionate about, and one that he hated? If you already knew the answer to your question, why ask? Did you feel the need to pull out the flamethrower on the first person who didn't agree with you? If you can't handle an argument based on a question you posed, and just need to flame, there are about 7,890,211 threads on these forums about the "Do u bunyhoppp or no lolol!!1" debate, go find one of those.
Also, how many very young people use these forums? I'm not saying that their opinions aren't valid obviously, but why would someone under the legal age to bear arms anyway really care about that right. Also, I recall when I was young many people thought their right to freedom of speech meant they could literally say anything to anyone any time they wanted, which is very appealing to a rebellious teenager. I think if you asked this question to a userbase where all members were adults with jobs, you may find the poll a bit closer. Unfortunately I'm sure a lot of people just clicked their button without giving any thought to the situation at all, and if that's what you wanted then I apologize for trying to make this thread a little smarter than a "OMG ya i luv 2 talk 2 so i vote 4 wut u like lets get ice cream" party.
Finally, in regard to a comment along the lines of "I feel sorry for people who have to be afraid of their government"; So do I. But have you seen our current presidency? Have you heard of the Patriot Act? Sadly, some of us who have a history of not trusting this government in the first place (Minorities especially) aren't very comfortable here with the way things are right now. So I apologize if all the people who DON'T live in this country don't understand what's happening. Your alien opinions just really don't matter much to someone who's living in the situation. Sorry.
Last edited by Not (2006-11-11 09:46:11)
Eloquently said... Enjoyed and much agreed with here.Not wrote:
Finally, in regard to a comment along the lines of "I feel sorry for people who have to be afraid of their government"; So do I. But have you seen our current presidency? Have you heard of the Patriot Act? Sadly, some of us who have a history of not trusting this government in the first place (Minorities especially) aren't very comfortable here with the way things are right now. So I apologize if all the people who DON'T live in this country don't understand what's happening. Your alien opinions just really don't matter much to someone who's living in the situation. Sorry.
I would pick the right to bear arms because then we would be able to build up stockpiles of weapons so we can get all our rights back.
You can say whatever the fuck you like when you're brandishing a big fuck-off gun!!! The anarchy might be a bit of a problem though...
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-11-11 10:33:17)
an old African proverb springs to mind "if you don't think something small can make a difference try and sleep in a room with a mosquito in it" or to borrow a metaphor from Bob Marley "If you are a big big tree? then I am a small axe ready to cut you down" - Guns didn't destroy Apartheid, Free Speech did - would the world ever have heard Martin Luther King declare "I have a dream" without free speech?Not wrote:
I think you misunderstood the context in which I used that quote. I was not saying that your question was poor, it's a very good question. I was using your original post to show Bubbalo what the real question in this topic was, since he goes off-topic constantly. You can read my other replies and you should be able to tell, I definitely AM thinking.sergeriver wrote:
You could start thinking yourself, it's a good exercise.Not wrote:
Can you please provide facts to support your claim that nobody in Britain is allowed to own a weapon?Bubbalo wrote:
How so? You have yet to prove your position. Britain has right to free speech but does not have right to bear arms.
From the OP:
Pretty simple question there isn't it? Which one would you choose? Did it say anything about specifying the already obvious in your argument? Please, your insanity is contagious. Stop thinking.Some of us don't feel the need to be obnoxious, loud, or controversial in everyone's face every day.sergeriver wrote:
I still can't believe 25% of the people voted for giving up their freedom of speech.
Let's examine "Freedom of Speech" shall we? Exactly what about this right is appealing to most people? The right to openly, publically criticize your government? We have that right now and look what it accomplishes. Nothing. This is because we have a voice, but nobody's listening to it. Watch Hannity and Colmes later this week. It's a great demonstration of how little your right to voice your opinion on government means when you stick two pigheaded egomaniacs against each other. It turns into nothing more than the D&ST section of these forums. People believe they know the only right way and they scream it at the top of their lungs, totally unable to accept anyone elses points of view, and often resorting to circular logic and off-topic quips to try to win listeners over to their side. Thankfully, this type of thing produces brainless followers who are completely unable to think about a situation outside of their own paradigm, and completely contradicting the point in the first place.
Tell me something, how is it that the OP made this post, with a poll, and chose one right he was so passionate about, and one that he hated? If you already knew the answer to your question, why ask? Did you feel the need to pull out the flamethrower on the first person who didn't agree with you? If you can't handle an argument based on a question you posed, and just need to flame, there are about 7,890,211 threads on these forums about the "Do u bunyhoppp or no lolol!!1" debate, go find one of those.
Also, how many very young people use these forums? I'm not saying that their opinions aren't valid obviously, but why would someone under the legal age to bear arms anyway really care about that right. Also, I recall when I was young many people thought their right to freedom of speech meant they could literally say anything to anyone any time they wanted, which is very appealing to a rebellious teenager. I think if you asked this question to a userbase where all members were adults with jobs, you may find the poll a bit closer. Unfortunately I'm sure a lot of people just clicked their button without giving any thought to the situation at all, and if that's what you wanted then I apologize for trying to make this thread a little smarter than a "OMG ya i luv 2 talk 2 so i vote 4 wut u like lets get ice cream" party.
Finally, in regard to a comment along the lines of "I feel sorry for people who have to be afraid of their government"; So do I. But have you seen our current presidency? Have you heard of the Patriot Act? Sadly, some of us who have a history of not trusting this government in the first place (Minorities especially) aren't very comfortable here with the way things are right now. So I apologize if all the people who DON'T live in this country don't understand what's happening. Your alien opinions just really don't matter much to someone who's living in the situation. Sorry.
Last edited by IG-Calibre (2006-11-11 11:19:09)
Right to bear arms.
that way, if anyone interrupts my speaking, I will light him up.
that way, if anyone interrupts my speaking, I will light him up.
I agree, even though I am a staunch gun owner, freedom of speech is much more important. What good is a gun if you can't talk about WHY you should have it in the first place.
Are you sure? Read your post.Not wrote:
Some of us don't feel the need to be obnoxious, loud, or controversial in everyone's face every day.
So, in your opinion you would be listened by using weapons, but you are not being listened now. They gave you the right to talk last Tuesday, did you use it?Not wrote:
Let's examine "Freedom of Speech" shall we? Exactly what about this right is appealing to most people? The right to openly, publically criticize your government? We have that right now and look what it accomplishes. Nothing. This is because we have a voice, but nobody's listening to it. Watch Hannity and Colmes later this week. It's a great demonstration of how little your right to voice your opinion on government means when you stick two pigheaded egomaniacs against each other. It turns into nothing more than the D&ST section of these forums. People believe they know the only right way and they scream it at the top of their lungs, totally unable to accept anyone elses points of view, and often resorting to circular logic and off-topic quips to try to win listeners over to their side. Thankfully, this type of thing produces brainless followers who are completely unable to think about a situation outside of their own paradigm, and completely contradicting the point in the first place.
I thought it was interesting, I don't see where the flaming is anyway, besides this post of yours . When did I say I hate weapons or arms? I love them, in the proper hands. Are you qualified to handle an AK-47? I'm not, so I don't. What would you do with arms to express against the government. Go and fight with a trained marine, that would end both your rights to freedom of speech and to bear arms.Not wrote:
Tell me something, how is it that the OP made this post, with a poll, and chose one right he was so passionate about, and one that he hated? If you already knew the answer to your question, why ask? Did you feel the need to pull out the flamethrower on the first person who didn't agree with you? If you can't handle an argument based on a question you posed, and just need to flame, there are about 7,890,211 threads on these forums about the "Do u bunyhoppp or no lolol!!1" debate, go find one of those.
Well, I can't lock the thread for grown ups only. The kids that posted voted for guns anyway. I don't think you made this thread smarter.Not wrote:
Also, how many very young people use these forums? I'm not saying that their opinions aren't valid obviously, but why would someone under the legal age to bear arms anyway really care about that right. Also, I recall when I was young many people thought their right to freedom of speech meant they could literally say anything to anyone any time they wanted, which is very appealing to a rebellious teenager. I think if you asked this question to a userbase where all members were adults with jobs, you may find the poll a bit closer. Unfortunately I'm sure a lot of people just clicked their button without giving any thought to the situation at all, and if that's what you wanted then I apologize for trying to make this thread a little smarter than a "OMG ya i luv 2 talk 2 so i vote 4 wut u like lets get ice cream" party.
Again, did you vote last Tuesday? That is your first tool to show the government you are upset with it. If my alien opinions don't matter why did you take care to reply in the first place? I don't get it. Sorry.Not wrote:
Finally, in regard to a comment along the lines of "I feel sorry for people who have to be afraid of their government"; So do I. But have you seen our current presidency? Have you heard of the Patriot Act? Sadly, some of us who have a history of not trusting this government in the first place (Minorities especially) aren't very comfortable here with the way things are right now. So I apologize if all the people who DON'T live in this country don't understand what's happening. Your alien opinions just really don't matter much to someone who's living in the situation. Sorry.
Cheers on your statement. +1AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
I agree, even though I am a staunch gun owner, freedom of speech is much more important. What good is a gun if you can't talk about WHY you should have it in the first place.
Why do I keep hearing, go and fight a trained marine? What is a marine at the end of his service? A citizen. I fail to see how the right to bear arms is made pointless, by the fact that skilled marines exist. At that, I fail to see how you're going to convince a demographic of marines who for the most part, enjoy their right to firearms, to kill their own people. The right to bear arms, inherently can give free speech. Free speech can't protect itself. To have free speech alone, you must rely on the being free speech is intended to keep you safe from, to continue to allow you to have it. That's not a very safe plan for the future.
What good is talk, when someone can point a gun in your face and silence you? Checks and balances folks...AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
I agree, even though I am a staunch gun owner, freedom of speech is much more important. What good is a gun if you can't talk about WHY you should have it in the first place.
I say you can't really have one with out the other.
well in this fantasy sitatuation, freedom of speech of course.
but they both go hand in hand as far as civil rights go, i mean you take one freedom away in exchange for another? that's just silly
im tired of people who complain about their rights and civl liberty's being dampered by the us goverment, i.e. NSA wiretaps..yet they want the right to own a weapon to be taken away from people who live in this country. kinda of ironic if you ask me
but they both go hand in hand as far as civil rights go, i mean you take one freedom away in exchange for another? that's just silly
im tired of people who complain about their rights and civl liberty's being dampered by the us goverment, i.e. NSA wiretaps..yet they want the right to own a weapon to be taken away from people who live in this country. kinda of ironic if you ask me
This is a very well thought out point and I commend you for bringing it up. However, you've actually brought up a great defense for the arms people. As influential as King was, his progress was slow, and he was killed. He made a lot of people THINK about civil rights for blacks, that's for sure. But if you study the history of black rights in this country, you'll notice that his words fell on many deaf ears of people who wouldn't accept the change.IG-Calibre wrote:
an old African proverb springs to mind "if you don't think something small can make a difference try and sleep in a room with a mosquito in it" or to borrow a metaphor from Bob Marley "If you are a big big tree? then I am a small axe ready to cut you down" - Guns didn't destroy Apartheid, Free Speech did - would the world ever have heard Martin Luther King declare "I have a dream" without free speech?Not wrote:
I think you misunderstood the context in which I used that quote. I was not saying that your question was poor, it's a very good question. I was using your original post to show Bubbalo what the real question in this topic was, since he goes off-topic constantly. You can read my other replies and you should be able to tell, I definitely AM thinking.sergeriver wrote:
You could start thinking yourself, it's a good exercise.Some of us don't feel the need to be obnoxious, loud, or controversial in everyone's face every day.sergeriver wrote:
I still can't believe 25% of the people voted for giving up their freedom of speech.
Let's examine "Freedom of Speech" shall we? Exactly what about this right is appealing to most people? The right to openly, publically criticize your government? We have that right now and look what it accomplishes. Nothing. This is because we have a voice, but nobody's listening to it. Watch Hannity and Colmes later this week. It's a great demonstration of how little your right to voice your opinion on government means when you stick two pigheaded egomaniacs against each other. It turns into nothing more than the D&ST section of these forums. People believe they know the only right way and they scream it at the top of their lungs, totally unable to accept anyone elses points of view, and often resorting to circular logic and off-topic quips to try to win listeners over to their side. Thankfully, this type of thing produces brainless followers who are completely unable to think about a situation outside of their own paradigm, and completely contradicting the point in the first place.
Tell me something, how is it that the OP made this post, with a poll, and chose one right he was so passionate about, and one that he hated? If you already knew the answer to your question, why ask? Did you feel the need to pull out the flamethrower on the first person who didn't agree with you? If you can't handle an argument based on a question you posed, and just need to flame, there are about 7,890,211 threads on these forums about the "Do u bunyhoppp or no lolol!!1" debate, go find one of those.
Also, how many very young people use these forums? I'm not saying that their opinions aren't valid obviously, but why would someone under the legal age to bear arms anyway really care about that right. Also, I recall when I was young many people thought their right to freedom of speech meant they could literally say anything to anyone any time they wanted, which is very appealing to a rebellious teenager. I think if you asked this question to a userbase where all members were adults with jobs, you may find the poll a bit closer. Unfortunately I'm sure a lot of people just clicked their button without giving any thought to the situation at all, and if that's what you wanted then I apologize for trying to make this thread a little smarter than a "OMG ya i luv 2 talk 2 so i vote 4 wut u like lets get ice cream" party.
Finally, in regard to a comment along the lines of "I feel sorry for people who have to be afraid of their government"; So do I. But have you seen our current presidency? Have you heard of the Patriot Act? Sadly, some of us who have a history of not trusting this government in the first place (Minorities especially) aren't very comfortable here with the way things are right now. So I apologize if all the people who DON'T live in this country don't understand what's happening. Your alien opinions just really don't matter much to someone who's living in the situation. Sorry.
Then along came Malcolm X. With guns in the streets, and he put fear into the people. He was a militant revolutionary, and despite the negative feelings that many people have about the Black Panthers and the way they went about creating change, you'll see that their method of revolution garnered results much faster. It was only after people were afraid of the ones they were oppressing that they really began to make quick progress toward equal rights.
So in this situation, the guns solved the problem, not the words. Again, King's method was pure and he was a great man, full of passion and courage. However his words, as true as they were, didn't move as many people into progressive action as Malcolm X's guns.
Serge, you clearly don't get it. Let me go post my first comment on this thread here for you, so you can't miss it.sergeriver wrote:
Are you sure? Read your post.Not wrote:
Some of us don't feel the need to be obnoxious, loud, or controversial in everyone's face every day.So, in your opinion you would be listened by using weapons, but you are not being listened now. They gave you the right to talk last Tuesday, did you use it?Not wrote:
Let's examine "Freedom of Speech" shall we? Exactly what about this right is appealing to most people? The right to openly, publically criticize your government? We have that right now and look what it accomplishes. Nothing. This is because we have a voice, but nobody's listening to it. Watch Hannity and Colmes later this week. It's a great demonstration of how little your right to voice your opinion on government means when you stick two pigheaded egomaniacs against each other. It turns into nothing more than the D&ST section of these forums. People believe they know the only right way and they scream it at the top of their lungs, totally unable to accept anyone elses points of view, and often resorting to circular logic and off-topic quips to try to win listeners over to their side. Thankfully, this type of thing produces brainless followers who are completely unable to think about a situation outside of their own paradigm, and completely contradicting the point in the first place.I thought it was interesting, I don't see where the flaming is anyway, besides this post of yours . When did I say I hate weapons or arms? I love them, in the proper hands. Are you qualified to handle an AK-47? I'm not, so I don't. What would you do with arms to express against the government. Go and fight with a trained marine, that would end both your rights to freedom of speech and to bear arms.Not wrote:
Tell me something, how is it that the OP made this post, with a poll, and chose one right he was so passionate about, and one that he hated? If you already knew the answer to your question, why ask? Did you feel the need to pull out the flamethrower on the first person who didn't agree with you? If you can't handle an argument based on a question you posed, and just need to flame, there are about 7,890,211 threads on these forums about the "Do u bunyhoppp or no lolol!!1" debate, go find one of those.Well, I can't lock the thread for grown ups only. The kids that posted voted for guns anyway. I don't think you made this thread smarter.Not wrote:
Also, how many very young people use these forums? I'm not saying that their opinions aren't valid obviously, but why would someone under the legal age to bear arms anyway really care about that right. Also, I recall when I was young many people thought their right to freedom of speech meant they could literally say anything to anyone any time they wanted, which is very appealing to a rebellious teenager. I think if you asked this question to a userbase where all members were adults with jobs, you may find the poll a bit closer. Unfortunately I'm sure a lot of people just clicked their button without giving any thought to the situation at all, and if that's what you wanted then I apologize for trying to make this thread a little smarter than a "OMG ya i luv 2 talk 2 so i vote 4 wut u like lets get ice cream" party.Again, did you vote last Tuesday? That is your first tool to show the government you are upset with it. If my alien opinions don't matter why did you take care to reply in the first place? I don't get it. Sorry.Not wrote:
Finally, in regard to a comment along the lines of "I feel sorry for people who have to be afraid of their government"; So do I. But have you seen our current presidency? Have you heard of the Patriot Act? Sadly, some of us who have a history of not trusting this government in the first place (Minorities especially) aren't very comfortable here with the way things are right now. So I apologize if all the people who DON'T live in this country don't understand what's happening. Your alien opinions just really don't matter much to someone who's living in the situation. Sorry.
My comment came after YOU posted this:
sergeriver wrote:
Why are the persons who voted for Arms not showing up?
So why the attacks on the people who voted for arms? Clearly I was able to argue a sound case, whereas all I've seen you do so far is attack the people who didn't agree with you by calling them idiots. I'm not attacking your position, and I haven't yet. All I'm doing is defending my own. There's no reason to attack your stance on freedom of speech, because it's clearly a sound stance. However, you're not leaving any room for other peoples' opinions in this thread. Which is odd, considering how obsessed you are with free speech....Ponder that a moment, will you?Not wrote:
Wow, that's a very good question. It's definitely something that can't be answered simply in my opinion. Of course my natural knee-jerk reaction is to say freedom of speech. However, in order to protect any other rights we have, what good does freedom of speech really do? Of course you'd be free to tell people how you really felt, but if you're under the thumb of a new militant regime who'd just as soon shoot you as change their policies based on a public demonstration of the people, then what use is it?
I suppose it depends entirely on the current state of affairs for the nation. If it was a situation where politicians actually listened to the people rather than making decisions in the best interests of whomever donated the most campaign money then maybe freedom of speech would be the best choice. However, if the government wouldn't listen to the people in the first place, you may have to force them to listen to something, and gun shots are pretty loud.
Being a bit jaded at the moment, I'm going to vote for the right to bear arms.
And yes, I voted. Though technically speaking, that's not even what we're talking about here in terms of free speech.
Last edited by Not (2006-11-11 15:17:52)
However the initial catalyst is always from speech - words can fill a heart with courage or hate, words can inspire, a gun cannot do any of these things. The OP states in this hypothetical scenario which would you rather have free speech or the right to bear arms, imo free speech winsNot wrote:
This is a very well thought out point and I commend you for bringing it up. However, you've actually brought up a great defense for the arms people. As influential as King was, his progress was slow, and he was killed. He made a lot of people THINK about civil rights for blacks, that's for sure. But if you study the history of black rights in this country, you'll notice that his words fell on many deaf ears of people who wouldn't accept the change.IG-Calibre wrote:
an old African proverb springs to mind "if you don't think something small can make a difference try and sleep in a room with a mosquito in it" or to borrow a metaphor from Bob Marley "If you are a big big tree? then I am a small axe ready to cut you down" - Guns didn't destroy Apartheid, Free Speech did - would the world ever have heard Martin Luther King declare "I have a dream" without free speech?Not wrote:
I think you misunderstood the context in which I used that quote. I was not saying that your question was poor, it's a very good question. I was using your original post to show Bubbalo what the real question in this topic was, since he goes off-topic constantly. You can read my other replies and you should be able to tell, I definitely AM thinking.sergeriver wrote:
You could start thinking yourself, it's a good exercise.
Some of us don't feel the need to be obnoxious, loud, or controversial in everyone's face every day.
Let's examine "Freedom of Speech" shall we? Exactly what about this right is appealing to most people? The right to openly, publically criticize your government? We have that right now and look what it accomplishes. Nothing. This is because we have a voice, but nobody's listening to it. Watch Hannity and Colmes later this week. It's a great demonstration of how little your right to voice your opinion on government means when you stick two pigheaded egomaniacs against each other. It turns into nothing more than the D&ST section of these forums. People believe they know the only right way and they scream it at the top of their lungs, totally unable to accept anyone elses points of view, and often resorting to circular logic and off-topic quips to try to win listeners over to their side. Thankfully, this type of thing produces brainless followers who are completely unable to think about a situation outside of their own paradigm, and completely contradicting the point in the first place.
Tell me something, how is it that the OP made this post, with a poll, and chose one right he was so passionate about, and one that he hated? If you already knew the answer to your question, why ask? Did you feel the need to pull out the flamethrower on the first person who didn't agree with you? If you can't handle an argument based on a question you posed, and just need to flame, there are about 7,890,211 threads on these forums about the "Do u bunyhoppp or no lolol!!1" debate, go find one of those.
Also, how many very young people use these forums? I'm not saying that their opinions aren't valid obviously, but why would someone under the legal age to bear arms anyway really care about that right. Also, I recall when I was young many people thought their right to freedom of speech meant they could literally say anything to anyone any time they wanted, which is very appealing to a rebellious teenager. I think if you asked this question to a userbase where all members were adults with jobs, you may find the poll a bit closer. Unfortunately I'm sure a lot of people just clicked their button without giving any thought to the situation at all, and if that's what you wanted then I apologize for trying to make this thread a little smarter than a "OMG ya i luv 2 talk 2 so i vote 4 wut u like lets get ice cream" party.
Finally, in regard to a comment along the lines of "I feel sorry for people who have to be afraid of their government"; So do I. But have you seen our current presidency? Have you heard of the Patriot Act? Sadly, some of us who have a history of not trusting this government in the first place (Minorities especially) aren't very comfortable here with the way things are right now. So I apologize if all the people who DON'T live in this country don't understand what's happening. Your alien opinions just really don't matter much to someone who's living in the situation. Sorry.
Then along came Malcolm X. With guns in the streets, and he put fear into the people. He was a militant revolutionary, and despite the negative feelings that many people have about the Black Panthers and the way they went about creating change, you'll see that their method of revolution garnered results much faster. It was only after people were afraid of the ones they were oppressing that they really began to make quick progress toward equal rights.
So in this situation, the guns solved the problem, not the words. Again, King's method was pure and he was a great man, full of passion and courage. However his words, as true as they were, didn't move as many people into progressive action as Malcolm X's guns.
Oh I agree with you 100% about the speech being a catalyst for many things. There's no doubt that the freedom of speech sparked what happened. My point was simply that without guns, the words (In that very specific situation) had no teeth against the people it had to reach the most. Which is why I said in my very first post that it's very difficult to decide which is the right I'd choose if I had to. It's a very complicated issue.
Then again...wasn't WWII's catalyst a gunshot? And weren't we brought into that through a Japanese assault on Pearl Harbor?
I don't want this to get drug off into a WWII topic but I'm just using these as examples to show that words aren't always what sparks change in the world. That's all.
Then again...wasn't WWII's catalyst a gunshot? And weren't we brought into that through a Japanese assault on Pearl Harbor?
I don't want this to get drug off into a WWII topic but I'm just using these as examples to show that words aren't always what sparks change in the world. That's all.
Last edited by Not (2006-11-11 15:28:25)