|
| Thread: 9 year old girl shoots instructor dead at gun range |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
posted August 28, 2014 07:59 PM |
|
|
That old thing again? Let me illustrate something. Literally. If the US government wants to oppress people using the army, you get to fight that:
... with that:
I won't bet on the second guy even in the most Hollywood-ish phatasmagorical scenario.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:03 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 20:09, 28 Aug 2014.
|
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws." - Colin Greenwood
Guns are the only way to fight tyranny in case it happens. People without guns are like an open door for tyrants, that's not causing tyranny sure, but it's enabling it. People with guns however are every tyrant's nightmare, and you just need to look into a history book to figure that out. It's so sound that I don't even know why I have to spell it. When only the police have the guns, it's called a Police State.
@Zenofex - That's a gross misrepresentation. If America wanted to use the army against its population, it'd be aprox 5000 tanks, aviation, etc. vs 200 mil armed people. I think the people would win eventually, either if they kill or get killed.
|
|
Sal
Famous Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:08 PM |
|
|
I think it has more to do with some guys wanting to hold in their hand something long, heavy and well loaded, for once.
Am I right, Fred?
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:12 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
@Zenofex - That's a gross misrepresentation. If America wanted to use the army against its population, it'd be aprox 5000 tanks, aviation, etc. vs 200 mil armed people. I think the people would win eventually, either if they killor get killed.
They may win, but not by fighting the army. How many tanks can a guy with a rifle kill? Exactly. How many guys with rifles can a tank kill? Depends on how much ammo and fuel it has. And you know, there are thing like... cluster bombs, napalm, tactical nukes, etc. If the government wants to kill people en masse and has the support of the army, you can be sure as hell that it will exterminate thousands before even one super-confident, liberty-loving dude with a shotgun can make a useless shot against that tank over there.
|
|
Sal
Famous Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:17 PM |
|
|
|
The army is not some vague and neutral structure. Army comes from people and has roots into the people. If the people decides to thrown a government, there are no enough tanks to return the obvious outcome.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:20 PM |
|
|
Sal said:
The army is not some vague and neutral structure. Army comes from people and has roots into the people. If the people decides to thrown a government, there are no enough tanks to return the obvious outcome.
Sure, that's how it is. But if the army can be used to overthrow the government, why arm the people for the same purpose? And if the people can't hope to fight the army, what's the point in carrying guns except for maybe home defense in the most crime-ridden neighbourhoods?
|
|
Sal
Famous Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:22 PM |
|
Edited by Sal at 20:24, 28 Aug 2014.
|
Al Capone said it why, and it resumes perfectly America from today:
You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:25 PM |
|
|
Ah, so Al Kapone is the role model for this. It starts to make sense. 
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:37 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 20:39, 28 Aug 2014.
|
Quote:
Guns are the only way to fight tyranny in case it happens. People without guns are like an open door for tyrants, that's not causing tyranny sure, but it's enabling it. People with guns however are every tyrant's nightmare, and you just need to look into a history book to figure that out. It's so sound that I don't even know why I have to spell it. When only the police have the guns, it's called a Police State.
Stevie, it really becomes pitiful when YOU advise ME to read history, especially when, all the time, your arguments make zero sense because you don't have the formation to comprehend historical progress.
1- A modern democracy wont switch to tyranny just out of the blue, it is economical and political suicide, they wont feel the need to anyway, so supporting guns for the possibility of that happening is not different than suggesting to walk with a helmet all the time in case a piano falls from the sky. This is not the 18th century.
2- However, if such a thing happens, people's best chance would be civil disobedience and a Gandhi-like way of passive resistance rather than disorganized cowboys everywhere, shooting at tanks and helicopters only to get killed. Actually, that kind of thing would cause the government to become more authoritarian, blaming the resisting people of terrorist acts with the media power it holds.
Anybody with the slightest grip of reality can easily see that "tyranny argument" is gun industry's propaganda for the ignorant. It's not going to happen and if it does, some musketeers wont march into militia. Self protection or hunting purposes at least make some sense, where as this is completely sucker material.
3- All of this has nothing to do with teaching 10 year-olds how to shoot shotguns. The gun culture US have and the right to own guns are not the same thing. You can maintain your right to bear arms without turning it into a national fetish and manufacturing shotguns designed for 10 year olds.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:39 PM |
|
|
|
The only pitiful thing is your ad hominem. I'm done here.
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:46 PM |
|
|
|
That post of artu made me feel a little warm inside ^^ Amen!
|
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 08:52 PM |
|
Edited by kayna at 20:55, 28 Aug 2014.
|
My guess is that the real American rulers like their countrymen to get used to guns early to influence their mentality.
If you re raised by left wing parents, you will probably be left wing as well ( as in higher than 50 % chances ). Same for a kid raised in a right wing minded family. Promoting guns is an indirect influence in favor of the right wing mentality. After all, the USA government is the police of the world, and they need as many votes and soldiers as possible in that regard. The less sad excuses to go to war, the better.
Just speculation on my part, of course. Maybe the US government flash desire of gun control knowing it will fail, just to appease the left wing in an illusion of "progress". Perhaps, in a century or less, they will have enough robots to fight wars ( like drones and such ) that they won't need to encourage their 9 years old citizens with guns and thus attempt a real gun control program then.
*shrug*
People and people in governments evolve a lot faster than Amendments and laws and other political papers. What I'm saying is perhaps the reason why the US promotes guns so much isn't the same as when the second amendment was written.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 09:28 PM |
|
|
lord, another hot topic. another thing to divide people, just like the bull**** about feminism. you guys will never learn.
Sal said:
I think it has more to do with some guys wanting to hold in their hand something long, heavy and well loaded, for once.
Am I right, Fred?
lol. have you ever held a gun, or shot one, sal? all kidding aside, it is a powerful freedom. it is a freedom that i would gladly die for, if it came down to it.
really, all of this has been said before, countless times, by countless people. you will always have people on both sides of the spectrum, and those in-between.
look at a poor country. no access to guns, or guns ineffective against their intended target? then they use BOMBS. bombs kill much more indiscriminately, than a firearm ever will.
knowing human stupidity as it is, i still am not swayed to think that humans shouldn't own guns. it's just a stupid argument.
the only way i would AGREE that humans shouldn't own guns, is if NO ONE owned guns. or bombs, or militaries, or NUCLEAR ****ing weapons. you guys really should get your priorities straight. human beings will disagree, and some will kill those they disagree. HOW THEY KILL ONE ANOTHER IS ENTIRELY BESIDES THE ****ING POINT.
like i always say, humanity never DID make much sense. they will endlessly debate everything EXCEPT that which TRULY matters. the CORE issue.
and why? because they don't know how to handle THEMSELVES.
|
|
Sal
Famous Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 09:39 PM |
|
|
fred79 said:
lol. have you ever held a gun, or shot one, sal?
No, but I am pretty sure I unloaded more often than you. 
K, no pun, just j/k
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 09:41 PM |
|
|
lol. i really don't think so, man. just in my teens, i'd have had you outnumbered, for the rest of your life. i'm talking 10 times a day, easy. 
|
|
Sal
Famous Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 09:43 PM |
|
|
|
not fair to count single sessions.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 09:45 PM |
|
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 11:09 PM |
|
|
Minion said:
That post of artu made me feel a little warm inside ^^ Amen!
Heheh
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 11:10 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Bearing arms is a right. Removal of such a right is not only wrong in and of itself, but there are negative effects on the population that imo outweigh the benefits. Sure, you don't have civilians that can kill each other, but you'll have a defenseless population, every tyrants dream. Speaking of tyrants, Hitler, Stalin and Mao - all of them banned the guns and look where that lead to.
So handing out guns to people prevents them from getting a tyrann as leader? You named 3 tyranns in a period of 30-40 years. Now let's compare that to about 230 countries and 200 years where you didn't had tyranns NOR weapons for the people. How is that?
Quote:
A government must fear its population, not the population fear the government. If you wanna disarm a population of 200 mil. just because a kid killed his instructor and there were some theatre shootings, you seriously gotta be kidding yourself.
How about NOBODY in a COUNTRY fears ANYONE?
Quote:
Washington said: "From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable... the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good."
So how many casualities with firearms are there in the united states in ONE year? Is there any country (which is NOT in a civil war) has HIGHER numbers?
Quote:
I understand that guns make killing very easy, but I'd rather have that with all the accidents and school shootings rather than feeling defenseless and without the means to do anything. You'd only make killing a bit harder, but trust me the killing won't stop. You don't need a gun to kill someone.
It seems like have never seen any other country than the US. Just compare the killing rates of the states to any of the western european countries. You will see how contradicitve your words are.
We have bad people in germany as well. We have kills also. But due to your logic, we should have MORE kills here than in the States because the people are unarmed here and ONLY the bad guys have weapons.
The facts clearly show the opposit...
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 28, 2014 11:52 PM |
|
|
angelito said:
So how many casualities with firearms are there in the united states in ONE year? Is there any country (which is NOT in a civil war) has HIGHER numbers?
hey, at least we're doing our part to help curb population growth. what have any of your countries done to help solve that growing issue?
|
| |
|
|
