|
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
By Jetackuu 2015-10-01 23:02:02
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »It's amazing what a government can do to its people when it has all of the firepower. That's one of the major things that the 2nd amendment is designed to protect against.
Yeah, I sure bet firearms matter against tanks, planes, chemical weapons, drones, and nukes. It's amazing what a government can do to its people when it has all of the firepower. That's one of the major things that the 2nd amendment is designed to protect against.
Nobody honestly believes that they hold any real power with small arms. Unless at least 5% of the population in any given area mounted an open rebellion and the other 95% stood by, they'd be nothing more than a dot on a map to the National Guard, and that's assuming they didn't deploy active duty soldiers. When the army had muskets and horses, the 2nd amendment made some sense in that context, not so much anymore. It's a relic of a different time, and if there weren't so many weapons floating around, it wouldn't change much if it went away.
You both are ignoring some very basic things, it's sad.
It's not a relic of a different time, you really need to brush up on your history.
A lot of things would change without it, but keep believing that, just keep it out of here.
[+]
By Jassik 2015-10-01 23:07:14
You both are ignoring some very basic things, it's sad.
It's not a relic of a different time, you really need to brush up on your history.
A lot of things would change without it, but keep believing that, just keep it out of here.
Just saying things doesn't make them true and you're way too emotional about guns to take the conversation any further.
By Jetackuu 2015-10-01 23:10:43
You both are ignoring some very basic things, it's sad.
It's not a relic of a different time, you really need to brush up on your history.
A lot of things would change without it, but keep believing that, just keep it out of here.
Just saying things doesn't make them true and you're way too emotional about guns to take the conversation any further.
Right back at you, on both accounts.
I'm not emotional about guns, it's purely logical. But there's plenty of reason to be emotional when people attack one's rights, it's offensive at the least.
But maybe your freedom of speech is outdated, who knows.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-10-01 23:24:04
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »Asura.Floppyseconds said: »It's amazing what a government can do to its people when it has all of the firepower. That's one of the major things that the 2nd amendment is designed to protect against.
Yeah, I sure bet firearms matter against tanks, planes, chemical weapons, drones, and nukes. It's amazing what a government can do to its people when it has all of the firepower. That's one of the major things that the 2nd amendment is designed to protect against.
Nobody honestly believes that they hold any real power with small arms. Unless at least 5% of the population in any given area mounted an open rebellion and the other 95% stood by, they'd be nothing more than a dot on a map to the National Guard, and that's assuming they didn't deploy active duty soldiers. When the army had muskets and horses, the 2nd amendment made some sense in that context, not so much anymore. It's a relic of a different time, and if there weren't so many weapons floating around, it wouldn't change much if it went away.
You both are ignoring some very basic things, it's sad.
It's not a relic of a different time, you really need to brush up on your history.
A lot of things would change without it, but keep believing that, just keep it out of here.
Still doesn't change the fact that no citizen needs or should have an automatic weapon.
Still doesn't change the fact that the government just works behind the scenes to get what it wants.
All an armed populous means is a long drawnout guerrilla war with the government. Unless supplied and funded by outside elements then the guerrillas are always just a long headache and that is it, they lose.
The first one is merely your opinion, not fact.
The second one: you mean loud and in front while under the guise of "gun control?" Yeah, we're aware, hence why people are fighting it, because they know they'll lose if they try it outright.
As for the last: you and Jassik severely overestimate the amount of people that would remain loyal to the US government if it tried to disarm it's citizens forcefully. I mean come on.
Let the loonies have their tin-foil, the pro-gun advocates have their guns, let the gays have their marriage, let the women have their abortions, etc. Stop attacking people and their rights, everyone.
By Jassik 2015-10-01 23:33:32
You both are ignoring some very basic things, it's sad.
It's not a relic of a different time, you really need to brush up on your history.
A lot of things would change without it, but keep believing that, just keep it out of here.
Just saying things doesn't make them true and you're way too emotional about guns to take the conversation any further.
Right back at you, on both accounts.
I'm not emotional about guns, it's purely logical. But there's plenty of reason to be emotional when people attack one's rights, it's offensive at the least.
But maybe your freedom of speech is outdated, who knows.
Yeah, not emotional at all.
By Jetackuu 2015-10-01 23:36:09
You both are ignoring some very basic things, it's sad.
It's not a relic of a different time, you really need to brush up on your history.
A lot of things would change without it, but keep believing that, just keep it out of here.
Just saying things doesn't make them true and you're way too emotional about guns to take the conversation any further.
Right back at you, on both accounts.
I'm not emotional about guns, it's purely logical. But there's plenty of reason to be emotional when people attack one's rights, it's offensive at the least.
But maybe your freedom of speech is outdated, who knows.
Yeah, not emotional at all.
Yeah, I'm not. Can we stop this pointless "discussion" now?
[+]
By Jassik 2015-10-01 23:39:33
Yeah, I'm not. Can we stop this pointless "discussion" now?
We'll have it again the next time there's a mass shooting, the kind that basically don't exist in all those other countries that don't have a lewd obsession with guns.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-10-01 23:40:58
Bismarck.Josiahfk said: »Let the loonies have their tin-foil, the pro-gun advocates have their guns, let the gays have their marriage, let the women have their abortions, etc. Stop attacking people and their rights, everyone. please don't equate this issue with basic human equality rights. This has nothing to do with "human rights"
Matter of a complete disagreement.
By Jetackuu 2015-10-01 23:41:20
Yeah, I'm not. Can we stop this pointless "discussion" now?
We'll have it again the next time there's a mass shooting, the kind that basically don't exist in all those other countries that don't have a lewd obsession with guns. Again, the insults are unnecessary.
By Jetackuu 2015-10-01 23:43:17
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »Jet, most of this whole *** thread is opinion.
I can't help that you feel paranoid about having guns taken away from you while innocent people continue to die due to the lack of control on them. Yet you asserted it as a fact, hence why I corrected you.
I don't feel paranoid at all. Innocent people die because there's *** up people in the world, not because of some "lack of gun regulation."
edit: the numbers may vary (not getting into that) but the price is well worth it as the alternative is way more disturbing.
edit2: Rav you try to talk to them, I'm way overdue for the sack.
[+]
 Bahamut.Ravael
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13640
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-10-01 23:54:02
The problem is that none of the gun control measures that could feasibly pass as law would do anything to deter mass-shooting maniacs. Heck, so many of the guns obtained by people who commit mass shootings were in situations where they didn't have anything on their record that would prevent them from buying them, or they just took them from people they knew. The only solution to that is prevent everyone from having them, which is never going to happen in the U.S. so people might as well just get over it.
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3686
By Phoenix.Amandarius 2015-10-02 01:10:44
I saw Hall & Oates tonight at the grand opening of The Fillmore in Philly.
ujelly?
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3686
By Phoenix.Amandarius 2015-10-02 01:40:33
Yeah, I'm not. Can we stop this pointless "discussion" now?
We'll have it again the next time there's a mass shooting, the kind that basically don't exist in all those other countries that don't have a lewd obsession with guns.
I think it's more of an obsession with celebrity and feeling like a complete loser because they are not famous that leads to most of these killings. It is a shortcut to fame in the mind of a very deranged, sick individual. Without a gun he could just plow his car through a crowd of people walking down the commons.
By Aeyela 2015-10-02 03:06:16
So it's okay if the President does it, but not Nausi?
Well the President doesn't post on these forums so it's difficult to use said forums to call him out on it.
By Aeyela 2015-10-02 06:17:57
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »I think it's more of an obsession with celebrity and feeling like a complete loser because they are not famous that leads to most of these killings. It is a shortcut to fame in the mind of a very deranged, sick individual. Without a gun he could just plow his car through a crowd of people walking down the commons.
Let's just completely ignore the fact that in countries that don't allow people to keep guns that doesn't happen very often and with nowhere near the regularity that gun attacks do in America. Smart logic. It seems every defense against "Guns are bad" is about as ludicrous as the "guns are good" arguments.
Here's your homework. Give me five examples in 2015 that somebody outside of America has gone on a killing spree by running people down. Good luck.
By Jetackuu 2015-10-02 07:24:45
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »Asura.Floppyseconds said: »Jet, most of this whole *** thread is opinion.
I can't help that you feel paranoid about having guns taken away from you while innocent people continue to die due to the lack of control on them. Yet you asserted it as a fact, hence why I corrected you.
I don't feel paranoid at all. Innocent people die because there's *** up people in the world, not because of some "lack of gun regulation."
A lot less innocent people being massacred by crazy people who can easily get guns. In places they can't easily get guns. The fact there are crazy people is entirely the reason that citizens shouldn't have automatics.
I mean there is one single argument that I can think of for an assault rifle, and that is to fight the government. How many of the people who own assault rifles are going to fight the government? That is why I assert it as a fact. Because you don't need it for home defense, hunting, etc. Instead they are used in massacres just about every year.
Yeah, no. If somebody wants to kill people then they will kill people, end of story.
The fact that there are crazy people willing to kill others is exactly why citizens should have guns.
I'm pretty sure you're confused, what most consider "assault rifles" (misnomer btw) aren't automatics.
I mean they keep wanting to ban the AR15 when it's not even that dangerous in comparison, it just looks "scary" when in fact it's functionally no different when it has a wood stock and sans pistol grip.
That's all you can think of, it still doesn't make it fact, but they actually work quite well at home defense (debatable, for sure).
The AR15 is also a very popular gun, go figure.
It's still not an assault rifle.
By Jetackuu 2015-10-02 07:25:45
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »I think it's more of an obsession with celebrity and feeling like a complete loser because they are not famous that leads to most of these killings. It is a shortcut to fame in the mind of a very deranged, sick individual. Without a gun he could just plow his car through a crowd of people walking down the commons.
Let's just completely ignore the fact that in countries that don't allow people to keep guns that doesn't happen very often and with nowhere near the regularity that gun attacks do in America. Smart logic. It seems every defense against "Guns are bad" is about as ludicrous as the "guns are good" arguments.
Here's your homework. Give me five examples in 2015 that somebody outside of America has gone on a killing spree by running people down. Good luck.
Let's also ignore the fact that these are still statistically irrelevant. You keep worrying about gun crime, us sane people will keep worrying about crime and especially violent crime as a whole, thanks.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-10-02 07:26:45
Asura.Floppyseconds said: »Best to do nothing then! When it comes to violating rights? Damn straight. But there are things we can do, but regulating arms more is not the answer (it's been tried before with very shitty results), and no the US is not the UK or Australia.
[+]
By Aeyela 2015-10-02 07:39:02
Let's also ignore the fact that these are still statistically irrelevant. You keep worrying about gun crime, us sane people will keep worrying about crime and especially violent crime as a whole, thanks.
It's topical.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-10-02 07:44:54
Let's also ignore the fact that these are still statistically irrelevant. You keep worrying about gun crime, us sane people will keep worrying about crime and especially violent crime as a whole, thanks.
It's topical.
Which if you adhere to that, then that's kind of disturbing.
By Aeyela 2015-10-02 07:46:01
Which if you adhere to that, then that's kind of disturbing.
What the hell are you on about?
サーバ: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-10-02 07:51:09
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
yep. here's even more proof...
-economy-failing-because-us-built-on-ancient-burial-ground...
By Jetackuu 2015-10-02 08:01:00
Which if you adhere to that, then that's kind of disturbing.
What the hell are you on about?
I personally find it disturbing that this is the conversation we're having after a tragedy (again) and actual methods to combat violence (as a whole) aren't talked about more often. Along with a whole bunch of other topics that spawn from that, but it's pointless.
By Aeyela 2015-10-02 08:02:24
Yeah, no. If somebody wants to kill people then they will kill people, end of story.
The fact that there are crazy people willing to kill others is exactly why citizens should have guns.
The fact that people can kill people anyway is the most absurdly pathetic reasoning you can possibly provide and it pretty much sums up why thousands of innocent people a year will continue to lose their lives. Imagine how many fewer people will have lost their lives in the two hundred and ninety five (295) mass shootings that have taken place this year, if your country had stricter laws and regulations? But it's okay, we have 'sane' (your words) people like you saying it's for self defense.
That works out real good for the thousands of victims of these massacres, doesn't it? You know, because they're legally allowed to carry guns to colleges and public places to defend themselves. Your logic is flawed but worse, the combined mass of bigots like you who think your individual rights are more important than the big picture is costing thousands of innocent people their lives.
And the most disturbing part? You actually legitimately think you're the sane ones.
Random Politics & Religion is for topics that aren't thread worthy on their own and do not have their own existing thread.
Rules and Guidelines
Forum Rules and P&R Section Guidelines still apply.
Satire is tolerated.
If your topic covers a story over 6 months old (Watergate, Benghazi, 2012 Election, etc.) post it here.
Discussions on racism, homophobia, transphobia, and the like are allowed, targeted insults based on these will not be tolerated.
Political debates get heated and are meant to be intense, if you take offense to being called or proven wrong, you don't belong here.
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen; if you prove you can't handle the criticism you bring upon yourself in this thread, you may be removed from it. You are responsible for what you post.
Along those lines, heat is fine, but sustained, clearly personal hostility is not okay. The personal attack rules still apply. Attack positions, not posters. Failure to adhere to this will result in your removal from the thread.
This thread is NOT the Flame Core.
These rules are subject to change and modification where and when needed.
Random Politics & Religion may be mained or demained depending on the activity within at a Moderator's discretion.
With that out of the way, let the debates begin!
/bow
|
|
