You really consider us free?
Toddler shoots mother in Walmart...
- Thread starter champdefrene
- Start date
You really consider us free?
genuineoriginal
New member
Not since the anti-gun fanatics have passed so many laws restricting gun ownership and gun use.
Morpheus
New member
And it doesn't stop at our borders either. The majority of the assault weapons, small arms, ammo and WMD sold to warlords and criminals are exported from the U.S. We are directly responsible for the global proliferation of arms. Even here we must admit that there really aren't any "illegal" arms manufacturers. So-called illegal arms almost all originated as legal arms. Relaxed regulation is only encouraged by lobbyists (funded by arms manufacturers, including the NRA) in order to boost profits for those manufacturers by making it easier to sell to criminals. In other words, greater regulation would not keep legal owners from actually defending themselves; it would only try to limit the transfer of weapons to those you wish to protect yourself from. And contrary to popular belief, assault weapons don't make you safer. Their existence only makes us all less safe.
Are you living in a dream world, or something? We've got more guns than any nation on earth. If guns equal freedom, we've got more freedom than anybody. Gun laws in this nation are remarkably lax and we've got 300 million of them out there.
Takes more than guns to make people "free."
Morpheus
New member
By that logic then we would not actually be free unless all of us could have cannons, tanks and nukes. If we all had those then we would all be safer too, right?
genuineoriginal
New member
Yes, it also takes the will to use them against a tyrannical government, as was done in the American Revolutionary War.
But, the tyrannical government has a solution for that, registration and confiscation.
Morpheus
New member
NoteTo NSA: I don't agree that this is a tyrannical gov't. Please don't confuse IP #s.
genuineoriginal
New member
_____
The Second Amendment: The Framers' Intentions
Since the fundamental purpose of the militia was to serve as a check upon a standing army, it would seem the words "well regulated" referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia(s) have the level of equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government's standing army.
_____
Exactly what would you like to be armed with in order to stand against the USA's standing Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines?The Second Amendment: The Framers' Intentions
Since the fundamental purpose of the militia was to serve as a check upon a standing army, it would seem the words "well regulated" referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia(s) have the level of equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government's standing army.
_____
genuineoriginal
New member
And since we don't, haven't, and won't, what does that tell you?
We can have all the guns and ammo we want. They don't care. And armchair Internet tough guys like you never actually do anything, so if you did pose a risk, believe me, you wouldn't be here.
This whole George Washington Rambo crap got real old a long time ago.
genuineoriginal
New member
It seems like you have a lot of faith in the government's ability to make people vanish.
Well they can, sure. What I actually meant was that if you were serious you wouldn't be near a computer right now. Off the grid and all that. Sitting on your butt talking about taking up arms against tyranny isn't actually doing anything. If you had the courage of your convictions you wouldn't talk.
The Berean
Well-known member
Says the guy with the V for Vendetta avatar
Spoiler
I always thinks it so ironic and funny that anarchist types love wearing those Guy Fawkes masks. Fawkes was in no way, shape, or form an anarchist. He was a Catholic Brit who wanted to reinstate a Catholic monarch by killing a King James I.
Morpheus
New member
My point was that we need limits set somewhere. Where we establish those limits should be regulated by what limits actually make us safer as a society, not by what generates the most profits for arms manufacturers.
The Berean
Well-known member
I agree guns alone will never win a "war" against the government. Actually IMO the most important "freedom fighters" in a "war" against the government would be computer hackers who could cripple major government/military computer networks.
genuineoriginal
New member
People fleeing to holes in the ground with their guns are not tryng to save the country.
The ones trying to save the country are starting with grass roots education to counter the mass media disinformation.
The criminals have the advantage ... which you don't seem to have a problem with.
Morpheus
New member
Says the guy with the V for Vendetta avatar
Spoiler
There's a difference between speaking truth to power and overthrowing that power.
Lots of words, don't mean a thing.
genuineoriginal
New member
Yes, there is.