Current Events > We need the 2nd Amendment to protect us from the government

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4
JacquesArch 12/09/18 2:09:47 PM #101:	Malcrasternus posted... Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things. What a dumb post. --- MH IGN: Jacques Arc <cite>JacquesArch posted [p:913828121] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Malcrasternus posted...</cite> <quote>Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things.</quote> What a dumb post.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 2:09:50 PM #102:	Malcrasternus posted... Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. Explain to me how these are two mutually exclusive things. --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913828124] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Malcrasternus posted...</cite> <quote>Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government.</quote> Explain to me how these are two mutually exclusive things.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tmaster148 12/09/18 2:10:00 PM #103:	Malcrasternus posted... Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things. So you think the only solution to dealing with an administration voted on by the people that you disagree with is to shoot them? --- https://imgur.com/BBcZDLJ <cite>Tmaster148 posted [p:913828132] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Malcrasternus posted...</cite> <quote>Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things.</quote> So you think the only solution to dealing with an administration voted on by the people that you disagree with is to shoot them?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Malcrasternus 12/09/18 2:10:35 PM #104:	JacquesArch posted... Malcrasternus posted... Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things. What a dumb post. Salty. --- https://imgur.com/yNe3tUF 4/15/1951 - 3/18/2014 "But not forgotten." <cite>Malcrasternus posted [p:913828160] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Malcrasternus posted...</cite> <quote>Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things.</quote> What a dumb post.</quote> Salty.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Anti-245 12/09/18 2:11:14 PM #105:	JacquesArch posted... Anti-245 posted... Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves? Yes, it was written mostly to preserve slavery by approving armned civilian slave patrols that would go around looking and hunting for escaped slaves. It was also use to drive off native people off their and defend their ill gotten gains when they did. So, how come people don't talk about this part? The authors of the 2nd amendment talked about it. --- Life in the DoB. <cite>Anti-245 posted [p:913828194] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Anti-245 posted...</cite> <quote>Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves?</quote> Yes, it was written mostly to preserve slavery by approving armned civilian slave patrols that would go around looking and hunting for escaped slaves.</quote> It was also use to drive off native people off their and defend their ill gotten gains when they did. So, how come people don't talk about this part? The authors of the 2nd amendment talked about it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Houston 12/09/18 2:12:50 PM #106:	JacquesArch posted... JacquesArch posted... Houston posted... JacquesArch posted... Tmaster148 posted... Space_Man posted... The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials? We have an entire system designed to eliminate the necessity for a violent overthrow of an unpopular administration, and it works. In fact, we are currently about to enter the beginning-game of removing this current administration. What are you laughing about? The fact that Trump is facing many criminal charges sooner than later is pretty funny, I'll give you that. So @Houston, what was so funny again? Have you been paying attention to the news at all? It's pretty clear Trump is guilty of what he has been investigated for, and much more actually. The investigation was intended to show that Trump colluded with Russia government to sway the outcome of the election. We don't see that here. I was laughing at you thinking the Senate would vote to impeach Trump --- Time keeps on slippin', slippin', slippin' <cite>Houston posted [p:913828291] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Houston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Space_Man posted...</cite> <quote>The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt</quote> Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials?</quote> We have an entire system designed to eliminate the necessity for a violent overthrow of an unpopular administration, and it works. In fact, we are currently about to enter the beginning-game of removing this current administration.</quote> </quote> What are you laughing about? The fact that Trump is facing many criminal charges sooner than later is pretty funny, I'll give you that.</quote> So @Houston, what was so funny again? Have you been paying attention to the news at all? It's pretty clear Trump is guilty of what he has been investigated for, and much more actually.</quote> The investigation was intended to show that Trump colluded with Russia government to sway the outcome of the election. We don't see that here. I was laughing at you thinking the Senate would vote to impeach Trump</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tmaster148 12/09/18 2:13:01 PM #107:	Anti-245 posted... JacquesArch posted... Anti-245 posted... Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves? Yes, it was written mostly to preserve slavery by approving armned civilian slave patrols that would go around looking and hunting for escaped slaves. It was also use to drive off native people off their and defend their ill gotten gains when they did. So, how come people don't talk about this part? The authors of the 2nd amendment talked about it. So really the 2nd amendment isn't meant to allow people to protect their own property. It's to allow you to steal property from other people. --- https://imgur.com/BBcZDLJ <cite>Tmaster148 posted [p:913828298] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Anti-245 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Anti-245 posted...</cite> <quote>Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves?</quote> Yes, it was written mostly to preserve slavery by approving armned civilian slave patrols that would go around looking and hunting for escaped slaves.</quote> It was also use to drive off native people off their and defend their ill gotten gains when they did. So, how come people don't talk about this part? The authors of the 2nd amendment talked about it.</quote> So really the 2nd amendment isn't meant to allow people to protect their own property. It's to allow you to steal property from other people.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Anti-245 12/09/18 2:16:20 PM #108:	Tmaster148 posted... Anti-245 posted... JacquesArch posted... Anti-245 posted... Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves? Yes, it was written mostly to preserve slavery by approving armned civilian slave patrols that would go around looking and hunting for escaped slaves. It was also use to drive off native people off their and defend their ill gotten gains when they did. So, how come people don't talk about this part? The authors of the 2nd amendment talked about it. So really the 2nd amendment isn't meant to allow people to protect their own property. It's to allow you to steal property from other people. Well, they'd argue that slaves were their property and the natives didn't have a concrete concept of private property that Europe had so, they were taking something that didn't "belong" to anyone. --- Life in the DoB. <cite>Anti-245 posted [p:913828460] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Anti-245 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Anti-245 posted...</cite> <quote>Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves?</quote> Yes, it was written mostly to preserve slavery by approving armned civilian slave patrols that would go around looking and hunting for escaped slaves.</quote> It was also use to drive off native people off their and defend their ill gotten gains when they did. So, how come people don't talk about this part? The authors of the 2nd amendment talked about it.</quote> So really the 2nd amendment isn't meant to allow people to protect their own property. It's to allow you to steal property from other people.</quote> Well, they'd argue that slaves were their property and the natives didn't have a concrete concept of private property that Europe had so, they were taking something that didn't "belong" to anyone.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 12/09/18 2:17:32 PM #109:	Anti-245 posted... Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves? No. <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:913828526] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Anti-245 posted...</cite> <quote>Wasn't the 2nd amendment introduced at the time not only for a possible tyrannical government but also to pursue settler colonialism and general white supremacy when it came to African slaves?</quote> No.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Malcrasternus 12/09/18 2:20:32 PM #110:	Tmaster148 posted... Malcrasternus posted... Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things. So you think the only solution to dealing with an administration voted on by the people that you disagree with is to shoot them? This logic is dim. You should feel bad for trying to use it. --- https://imgur.com/yNe3tUF 4/15/1951 - 3/18/2014 "But not forgotten." <cite>Malcrasternus posted [p:913828701] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Malcrasternus posted...</cite> <quote>Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things.</quote> So you think the only solution to dealing with an administration voted on by the people that you disagree with is to shoot them?</quote> This logic is dim. You should feel bad for trying to use it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tmaster148 12/09/18 2:24:55 PM #111:	Malcrasternus posted... Tmaster148 posted... Malcrasternus posted... Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things. So you think the only solution to dealing with an administration voted on by the people that you disagree with is to shoot them? This logic is dim. You should feel bad for trying to use it. You are implying that the only way to invoke change in an administration you disagree with is to shoot them. --- https://imgur.com/BBcZDLJ <cite>Tmaster148 posted [p:913828921] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Malcrasternus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Malcrasternus posted...</cite> <quote>Interesting that the folks that say there's nothing that an armed population can do, also tend to be the most vocal against current government. It's like you guys are just used to rolling over when any actual effort is required to change things.</quote> So you think the only solution to dealing with an administration voted on by the people that you disagree with is to shoot them?</quote> This logic is dim. You should feel bad for trying to use it.</quote> You are implying that the only way to invoke change in an administration you disagree with is to shoot them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 2:26:04 PM #112:	I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913828976] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 12/09/18 2:27:52 PM #113:	RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:913829086] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 2:30:29 PM #114:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? Then we elect them out? That's literally the whole reason this system exists. --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913829239] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> Then we elect them out? That's literally the whole reason this system exists.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 12/09/18 2:33:56 PM #115:	RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? Then we elect them out? Then it's not a tyrannical government. What stops a dictator from just going "nah"? <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:913829447] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> Then we elect them out? </quote> Then it's not a tyrannical government. What stops a dictator from just going "nah"?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 2:36:06 PM #116:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? Then we elect them out? Then it's not a tyrannical government. That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S. --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913829587] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> Then we elect them out? </quote> Then it's not a tyrannical government.</quote> That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 2:37:03 PM #117:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... What stops a dictator from just going "nah"? And who's going to be the dictator in the U.S. democratic system? --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913829650] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote> What stops a dictator from just going "nah"?</quote> And who's going to be the dictator in the U.S. democratic system?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JacquesArch 12/09/18 2:38:17 PM #118:	Houston posted... JacquesArch posted... JacquesArch posted... Houston posted... JacquesArch posted... Tmaster148 posted... Space_Man posted... The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials? We have an entire system designed to eliminate the necessity for a violent overthrow of an unpopular administration, and it works. In fact, we are currently about to enter the beginning-game of removing this current administration. What are you laughing about? The fact that Trump is facing many criminal charges sooner than later is pretty funny, I'll give you that. So @Houston, what was so funny again? Have you been paying attention to the news at all? It's pretty clear Trump is guilty of what he has been investigated for, and much more actually. The investigation was intended to show that Trump colluded with Russia government to sway the outcome of the election. We don't see that here. I was laughing at you thinking the Senate would vote to impeach Trump Are you fucking kidding? Lol, that is certainly what the investigation will / has proven. Maybe you should pay attention to current events. --- MH IGN: Jacques Arc <cite>JacquesArch posted [p:913829717] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Houston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Houston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Space_Man posted...</cite> <quote>The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt</quote> Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials?</quote> We have an entire system designed to eliminate the necessity for a violent overthrow of an unpopular administration, and it works. In fact, we are currently about to enter the beginning-game of removing this current administration.</quote> </quote> What are you laughing about? The fact that Trump is facing many criminal charges sooner than later is pretty funny, I'll give you that.</quote> So @Houston, what was so funny again? Have you been paying attention to the news at all? It's pretty clear Trump is guilty of what he has been investigated for, and much more actually.</quote> The investigation was intended to show that Trump colluded with Russia government to sway the outcome of the election. We don't see that here. I was laughing at you thinking the Senate would vote to impeach Trump</quote> Are you fucking kidding? Lol, that is certainly what the investigation will / has proven. Maybe you should pay attention to current events.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 12/09/18 2:40:13 PM #119:	RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? Then we elect them out? Then it's not a tyrannical government. That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S. That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst. <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:913829833] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> Then we elect them out? </quote> Then it's not a tyrannical government.</quote> That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S.</quote> That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JacquesArch 12/09/18 2:41:17 PM #120:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? Then we elect them out? Then it's not a tyrannical government. That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S. That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst. You are counting on hypotheticals that aren't even in the realm of the realistic right now or in the foreseeable future. --- MH IGN: Jacques Arc <cite>JacquesArch posted [p:913829903] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> Then we elect them out? </quote> Then it's not a tyrannical government.</quote> That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S.</quote> That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst.</quote> You are counting on hypotheticals that aren't even in the realm of the realistic right now or in the foreseeable future.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 2:44:40 PM #121:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? Then we elect them out? Then it's not a tyrannical government. That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S. That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst. So what's the plan then? Give a bunch of civilians a bunch of guns to shoot at elected officials and the other half of the general population that voted for them who also have the right to bear arms? --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913830068] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> Then we elect them out? </quote> Then it's not a tyrannical government.</quote> That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S.</quote> That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst.</quote> So what's the plan then? Give a bunch of civilians a bunch of guns to shoot at elected officials and the other half of the general population that voted for them who also have the right to bear arms?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 12/09/18 2:49:23 PM #122:	RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns. What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed? Then we elect them out? Then it's not a tyrannical government. That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S. That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst. So what's the plan then? Give a bunch of civilians a bunch of guns to shoot at elected officials and the other half of the general population that voted for them who also have the right to bear arms? This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people. <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:913830319] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote>I'm still waiting on you to explain why an armed insurgency would be effective or necessary in a country where leadership is voted for by the people. Because if we ever did come to a genuine tyrannical government, it'd be because Americans as a whole are stupid, uninformed or too lazy to use their voting power, not because we don't have guns.</quote> What happens when the government is all on the same page? Where are the checks and balances then if the public is not armed?</quote> Then we elect them out? </quote> Then it's not a tyrannical government.</quote> That's the whole point. This isn't a thing that happens in the U.S.</quote> That's very naive to say that it will never happen. You take precautions for the worst.</quote> So what's the plan then? Give a bunch of civilians a bunch of guns to shoot at elected officials and the other half of the general population that voted for them who also have the right to bear arms?</quote> This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 2:53:09 PM #123:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people. That makes your point even more absurd then. --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913830515] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people.</quote> That makes your point even more absurd then.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
P4wn4g3 12/09/18 2:54:38 PM #124:	Stupid topic considering it would take a majority of states voting on this to even touch the issue. But you probably don't need a gun TC. You're what one might call an "at risk" Individual. --- 7D ChessMaster of Dark Aether https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/851-dark-aether <cite>P4wn4g3 posted [p:913830584] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>Stupid topic considering it would take a majority of states voting on this to even touch the issue. But you probably don't need a gun TC. You're what one might call an "at risk" Individual.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 12/09/18 2:54:44 PM #125:	RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people. That makes your point even more absurd then. How? <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:913830591] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people.</quote> That makes your point even more absurd then.</quote> How?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 12/09/18 2:55:34 PM #126:	"We need to be protected from tyranny!" sits on ass and has yet to take up arms against any iteration of the U.S. government" --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:913830634] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>"We need to be protected from tyranny!" sits on ass and has yet to take up arms against any iteration of the U.S. government"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 3:03:46 PM #127:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people. That makes your point even more absurd then. How? Because now you're suggesting people take on both the government (mind you a government from a nightmare scenario that would never happen in the U.S. because there's no one person in the government that's allowed to do whatever the hell they want) and the more than half of the population that voted them in. --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913831020] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people.</quote> That makes your point even more absurd then.</quote> How?</quote> Because now you're suggesting people take on both the government (mind you a government from a nightmare scenario that would never happen in the U.S. because there's no one person in the government that's allowed to do whatever the hell they want) and the more than half of the population that voted them in.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Space_Man 12/09/18 3:11:09 PM #128:	Tmaster148 posted... Space_Man posted... The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials? Uh, do you know how to read? The topic title is talking about protecting us from govt which lots of libs feel is a "threat to them" lrn2read --- There sure are a lot of different mes just like you have a lot of different yous! I'm going outside to play now I hope all the different yous have fun too. Bye! <cite>Space_Man posted [p:913831423] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Space_Man posted...</cite> <quote>The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt</quote> Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials?</quote> Uh, do you know how to read? The topic title is talking about protecting us from govt which lots of libs feel is a "threat to them" lrn2read</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RoboLaserGandhi 12/09/18 3:13:25 PM #129:	RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people. That makes your point even more absurd then. How? Because now you're suggesting people take on both the government (mind you a government from a nightmare scenario that would never happen in the U.S. because there's no one person in the government that's allowed to do whatever the hell they want) and the more than half of the population that voted them in. I suggest you look up how dictators come into power in democratic governments. Immense turmoil causes people to turn to extremist leaders, and then those they elect stabilize the country at great cost to freedom, which they eventually can no longer tolerate. <cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted [p:913831559] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people.</quote> That makes your point even more absurd then.</quote> How?</quote> Because now you're suggesting people take on both the government (mind you a government from a nightmare scenario that would never happen in the U.S. because there's no one person in the government that's allowed to do whatever the hell they want) and the more than half of the population that voted them in.</quote> I suggest you look up how dictators come into power in democratic governments. Immense turmoil causes people to turn to extremist leaders, and then those they elect stabilize the country at great cost to freedom, which they eventually can no longer tolerate.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RickyTheBAWSE 12/09/18 3:14:31 PM #130:	hypothetical arguments not based in any American reality is the only life some know --- Never let those intent on misunderstanding you be the narrator to YOUR story! Context? Context!? CONTEXT!!! <cite>RickyTheBAWSE posted [p:913831620] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>hypothetical arguments not based in any American reality is the only life some know</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RchHomieQuanChi 12/09/18 3:31:31 PM #131:	RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... RchHomieQuanChi posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people. That makes your point even more absurd then. How? Because now you're suggesting people take on both the government (mind you a government from a nightmare scenario that would never happen in the U.S. because there's no one person in the government that's allowed to do whatever the hell they want) and the more than half of the population that voted them in. I suggest you look up how dictators come into power in democratic governments. Immense turmoil causes people to turn to extremist leaders, and then those they elect stabilize the country at great cost to freedom, which they eventually can no longer tolerate. Which isn't a realistic problem for the U.S. because even elected leaders have other officials they have to go through first to get anything done. The only way anything close to what you're suggesting can happen is if the entire country consistently elects officials who all agree with each other to serve in office at the exact same time. And lol if you think that's happening anytime soon, if at all. --- I have nothing else to say <cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted [p:913832501] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RchHomieQuanChi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote>This isn't going to be a situation in which there are two halves of a population voting for different people.</quote> That makes your point even more absurd then.</quote> How?</quote> Because now you're suggesting people take on both the government (mind you a government from a nightmare scenario that would never happen in the U.S. because there's no one person in the government that's allowed to do whatever the hell they want) and the more than half of the population that voted them in.</quote> I suggest you look up how dictators come into power in democratic governments. Immense turmoil causes people to turn to extremist leaders, and then those they elect stabilize the country at great cost to freedom, which they eventually can no longer tolerate.</quote> Which isn't a realistic problem for the U.S. because even elected leaders have other officials they have to go through first to get anything done. The only way anything close to what you're suggesting can happen is if the entire country consistently elects officials who all agree with each other to serve in office at the exact same time. And lol if you think that's happening anytime soon, if at all.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tmaster148 12/09/18 5:55:09 PM #132:	Space_Man posted... Tmaster148 posted... Space_Man posted... The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials? Uh, do you know how to read? The topic title is talking about protecting us from govt which lots of libs feel is a "threat to them" lrn2read So do you feel that the only way to deal with a government you disapprove of is to shoot politicians? The fact you avoided answering the question and followed with a personal attacak leads me to believe you do. --- https://imgur.com/BBcZDLJ <cite>Tmaster148 posted [p:913840537] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Space_Man posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Space_Man posted...</cite> <quote>The only thing I don't get is a lot of the people crying for more gun regulations are super against Trump and the current govt</quote> Do you believe that if you are against the current admin that the only means to resolve the issue is to kill government elected officials?</quote> Uh, do you know how to read? The topic title is talking about protecting us from govt which lots of libs feel is a "threat to them" lrn2read</quote> So do you feel that the only way to deal with a government you disapprove of is to shoot politicians? The fact you avoided answering the question and followed with a personal attacak leads me to believe you do.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Anti-245 12/09/18 6:00:26 PM #133:	Any persons talking about fighting against the current if it goes tyrannical are contemplating suicide. How would you even know if the U.S. was tyrannical or not currently anyway? --- Life in the DoB. <cite>Anti-245 posted [p:913840836] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>Any persons talking about fighting against the current if it goes tyrannical are contemplating suicide. How would you even know if the U.S. was tyrannical or not currently anyway?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SixStringHero 12/09/18 7:31:48 PM #134:	JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives. <cite>SixStringHero posted [p:913846803] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat</quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SixStringHero 12/09/18 7:34:06 PM #135:	monkmith posted... RoboLaserGandhi posted... monkmith posted... Houston posted... Or how about we need the 2md amendment because it's what the founding fathers intended? so muskets and mandatory military service for all? at least until there's a rebellion... You're dishonest if you think the founding fathers had no concept of the advancement of technology. They went from pikes and blades to every soldier armed with a rifle in only their parents/grandparents lifetimes. you're foolish if you think they could even picture something like a gatling gun since guns hadn't changed that much since the 1300s... https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2018/03/11/multi-shot-assault-weapons-of-the-1700s-and-the-2nd-amendment/ Educate yourself. <cite>SixStringHero posted [p:913846973] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>monkmith posted...</cite> <quote><cite>RoboLaserGandhi posted...</cite> <quote><cite>monkmith posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Houston posted...</cite> <quote>Or how about we need the 2md amendment because it's what the founding fathers intended?</quote> so muskets and mandatory military service for all? at least until there's a rebellion...</quote> You're dishonest if you think the founding fathers had no concept of the advancement of technology. They went from pikes and blades to every soldier armed with a rifle in only their parents/grandparents lifetimes.</quote> you're foolish if you think they could even picture something like a gatling gun since guns hadn't changed that much since the 1300s...</quote> https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2018/03/11/multi-shot-assault-weapons-of-the-1700s-and-the-2nd-amendment/ Educate yourself.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SixStringHero 12/09/18 7:37:27 PM #136:	CrimsonRage posted... >america: gun control will never work >australia: implements gun control and it works >america: surprised pikachu face Apples to oranges comparison. Pre 1996 ban, Australia's crime rate was already on the decline. At present they are back to around the same level of gun ownership and they haven't had a spike in gun related violence. Australia doesn't have the population density the US has. Australia also doesn't have the same gang and drug problems the US has which accounts for the majority of gun homicides annually. Australia also doesn't have the history behind it that the US has when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. The gun violence problem in the US is cultural. Also, a mandatory buy back would never work and is completely unconstitutional. <cite>SixStringHero posted [p:913847233] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>CrimsonRage posted...</cite> <quote>>america: gun control will never work >australia: implements gun control and it works >america: surprised pikachu face</quote> Apples to oranges comparison. Pre 1996 ban, Australia's crime rate was already on the decline. At present they are back to around the same level of gun ownership and they haven't had a spike in gun related violence. Australia doesn't have the population density the US has. Australia also doesn't have the same gang and drug problems the US has which accounts for the majority of gun homicides annually. Australia also doesn't have the history behind it that the US has when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. The gun violence problem in the US is cultural. Also, a mandatory buy back would never work and is completely unconstitutional.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AlephZero 12/09/18 7:38:50 PM #137:	nobody wants to take your guns --- "life is overrated" - Seiichi Omori 01001100 01010101 01000101 00100000 00110100 00110000 00110010 <cite>AlephZero posted [p:913847315] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>nobody wants to take your guns</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 12/09/18 7:39:52 PM #138:	I've made the point in past topics: the US has had tyranny. Its gun owners largely sat idly by, or in some cases helped carry it out. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:913847379] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>I've made the point in past topics: the US has had tyranny. Its gun owners largely sat idly by, or in some cases helped carry it out.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Anti-245 12/09/18 7:42:14 PM #139:	Antifar posted... I've made the point in past topics: the US has had tyranny. Its gun owners largely sat idly by, or in some cases helped carry it out. Had? So, you're saying it doesn't currently? --- Life in the DoB. <cite>Anti-245 posted [p:913847503] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>I've made the point in past topics: the US has had tyranny. Its gun owners largely sat idly by, or in some cases helped carry it out.</quote> Had? So, you're saying it doesn't currently?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MakoReizei 12/09/18 7:42:43 PM #140:	JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario --- https://i.imgtc.com/3owskMW.png <cite>MakoReizei posted [p:913847531] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat</quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RickyTheBAWSE 12/09/18 9:35:55 PM #141:	MakoReizei posted... JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario because that's almost as silly as your question itself? what point are you even trying to make with this question? --- Never let those intent on misunderstanding you be the narrator to YOUR story! Context? Context!? CONTEXT!!! <cite>RickyTheBAWSE posted [p:913853603] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>MakoReizei posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat </quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario</quote> because that's almost as silly as your question itself? what point are you even trying to make with this question?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dark_Spiret 12/09/18 9:50:30 PM #142:	depends on your definition of tyranny i suppose. a lot of the bullshit people consider to be "tyranny" today would be the best thing ever 100 years ago. people today are largely pacified pussies and consider anything that hurts their feelings as tyranny. <cite>Dark_Spiret posted [p:913854312] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>depends on your definition of tyranny i suppose. a lot of the bullshit people consider to be "tyranny" today would be the best thing ever 100 years ago. people today are largely pacified pussies and consider anything that hurts their feelings as tyranny.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JacquesArch 12/09/18 10:47:49 PM #143:	SixStringHero posted... JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives. Hahaha, source please. --- MH IGN: Jacques Arc <cite>JacquesArch posted [p:913857119] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>SixStringHero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat</quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives.</quote> Hahaha, source please.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JacquesArch 12/09/18 10:49:24 PM #144:	MakoReizei posted... JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario Uh, I do. --- MH IGN: Jacques Arc <cite>JacquesArch posted [p:913857223] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>MakoReizei posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat</quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario</quote> Uh, I do.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MakoReizei 12/09/18 10:52:15 PM #145:	RickyTheBAWSE posted... MakoReizei posted... JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario because that's almost as silly as your question itself? what point are you even trying to make with this question? Not sure what's silly about it --- https://i.imgtc.com/3owskMW.png <cite>MakoReizei posted [p:913857359] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>RickyTheBAWSE posted...</cite> <quote><cite>MakoReizei posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote> <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat </quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> So why not leave your doors unlocked since it's an extremely rare scenario</quote> because that's almost as silly as your question itself? what point are you even trying to make with this question?</quote> Not sure what's silly about it</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SixStringHero 12/10/18 12:58:16 AM #146:	JacquesArch posted... SixStringHero posted... JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives. Hahaha, source please. http://reason.com/blog/2018/09/04/what-the-cdcs-mid-90s-surveys-on-defensi#comment <cite>SixStringHero posted [p:913862885] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SixStringHero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat</quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives.</quote> Hahaha, source please.</quote> http://reason.com/blog/2018/09/04/what-the-cdcs-mid-90s-surveys-on-defensi#comment</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
yillin 12/10/18 1:02:45 AM #147:	You are crazy if you think America could ever have a revolution again. If you think the everyday citizen armed with a citizen level weapon (handgun, shotgun, semi-auto rifle) thinks they are a competition for the strongest military in the world then I got a bridge in the Sahara to sell you. The only way a violent revolution (aka guns and shooting) would ever work anymore in this country is if the leader(s) killing the civilians got so sick to their stomachs that they magically woke up to the atrocities they were committing. That or the military also revolts against the government. Problem is that they are so brainwashed to obey (by design, to help them perform in combat) that it will never happen. --- There's a calm before the storm and the western front is quiet. I've got Rembrandt as my right hand and Solo as my pilot. <cite>yillin posted [p:913863037] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote>You are crazy if you think America could ever have a revolution again. If you think the everyday citizen armed with a citizen level weapon (handgun, shotgun, semi-auto rifle) thinks they are a competition for the strongest military in the world then I got a bridge in the Sahara to sell you. The only way a violent revolution (aka guns and shooting) would ever work anymore in this country is if the leader(s) killing the civilians got so sick to their stomachs that they magically woke up to the atrocities they were committing. That or the military also revolts against the government. Problem is that they are so brainwashed to obey (by design, to help them perform in combat) that it will never happen.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JacquesArch 12/10/18 1:36:28 AM #148:	SixStringHero posted... JacquesArch posted... SixStringHero posted... JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives. Hahaha, source please. http://reason.com/blog/2018/09/04/what-the-cdcs-mid-90s-surveys-on-defensi#comment ..And you post to a literal fake news source. --- MH IGN: Jacques Arc <cite>JacquesArch posted [p:913864093] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>SixStringHero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SixStringHero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat</quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives.</quote> Hahaha, source please.</quote> http://reason.com/blog/2018/09/04/what-the-cdcs-mid-90s-surveys-on-defensi#comment</quote> ..And you post to a literal fake news source.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JacquesArch 12/10/18 1:43:46 AM #149:	JacquesArch posted... SixStringHero posted... JacquesArch posted... SixStringHero posted... JacquesArch posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives. Hahaha, source please. http://reason.com/blog/2018/09/04/what-the-cdcs-mid-90s-surveys-on-defensi#comment ..And you post to a literal fake news source. ..that doesn't even back your statement up of a possible three million number for defensive firearm usage per year. In fact, the idiot who "analyzed" this data fucked up the first time and had to cut his results in half. Probably fucked up the second time too, but reason.com isn't bothering to double check this time. --- MH IGN: Jacques Arc <cite>JacquesArch posted [p:913864326] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SixStringHero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SixStringHero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JacquesArch posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Breaking News: CEman monkmith killed by multiple home invaders after trying to attack one with a baseball bat</quote> Breaking News: CEman monkmith's house was never invaded by anyone in the first place because that is an extremely rare scenario that almost no person will ever experience in their life</quote> Defensive gun use occurs anywhere from 500,000 - 3 million times annually in the US. Defensive gun use can be instances where a fire arm is brandished or is mentioned in an incident that deters a would be criminal. Firearms save lives.</quote> Hahaha, source please.</quote> http://reason.com/blog/2018/09/04/what-the-cdcs-mid-90s-surveys-on-defensi#comment</quote> ..And you post to a literal fake news source.</quote> ..that doesn't even back your statement up of a possible three million number for defensive firearm usage per year. In fact, the idiot who "analyzed" this data fucked up the first time and had to cut his results in half. Probably fucked up the second time too, but reason.com isn't bothering to double check this time.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dark_Spiret 12/10/18 3:01:27 AM #150:	yillin posted... You are crazy if you think America could ever have a revolution again. If you think the everyday citizen armed with a citizen level weapon (handgun, shotgun, semi-auto rifle) thinks they are a competition for the strongest military in the world then I got a bridge in the Sahara to sell you hypothetically, it really wouldnt take much to fuck up the government especially when a real fight wouldnt go down like they did in the 1700's. timothy mcveigh showed what crazy is capable of (ironically due to the government overplaying their hand), christopher dorner had the lapd spooked into shooting at innocent people. even the latest trump lover who mailed all those pipebombs had the media panicking. people run everything still and people need places to sleep, familys to have ect. which are all still susceptible to bullets and intimidation. its hard to fight a drone at 2000feet, its not hard to take down the person who controls it or the individuals who have to cover the tanks from the rear. its also not hard to turn the public against the military who are conveniently intermixed with each other making it all even more of a clusterfuck. IF it ever got to that point it would be an absolute shit show. the core question is if it would ever get to that point. we have a lot of checks and balances in this country to make sure it hopefully never gets to that, but it has happened to other countries in the past and humanity is a very flawed creature who is very much capable of falling down that shit hole. having the citizens own their own firepower is just one more check to the system from having that happen. <cite>Dark_Spiret posted [p:913866385] in We need th... [t:77285083]...</cite> <quote><cite>yillin posted...</cite> <quote>You are crazy if you think America could ever have a revolution again. If you think the everyday citizen armed with a citizen level weapon (handgun, shotgun, semi-auto rifle) thinks they are a competition for the strongest military in the world then I got a bridge in the Sahara to sell you</quote>hypothetically, it really wouldnt take much to fuck up the government especially when a real fight wouldnt go down like they did in the 1700's. timothy mcveigh showed what crazy is capable of (ironically due to the government overplaying their hand), christopher dorner had the lapd spooked into shooting at innocent people. even the latest trump lover who mailed all those pipebombs had the media panicking. people run everything still and people need places to sleep, familys to have ect. which are all still susceptible to bullets and intimidation. its hard to fight a drone at 2000feet, its not hard to take down the person who controls it or the individuals who have to cover the tanks from the rear. its also not hard to turn the public against the military who are conveniently intermixed with each other making it all even more of a clusterfuck. IF it ever got to that point it would be an absolute shit show. the core question is if it would ever get to that point. we have a lot of checks and balances in this country to make sure it hopefully never gets to that, but it has happened to other countries in the past and humanity is a very flawed creature who is very much capable of falling down that shit hole. having the citizens own their own firepower is just one more check to the system from having that happen.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4

Current Events > We need the 2nd Amendment to protect us from the government (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > We need the 2nd Amendment to protect us from the government