Thread: guns

Originally Posted by Never

Your point?

No point really, other than to agree with you.

The day before the country bans guns is the day I buy one and lots of ammo to go with it.

our forefathers wanted us the right to bare arms so we can fight an oppressive government. but come one people! this is 2008! times have changed

do you really think a gun is going to save you from the government? what backwards cave man logic is that? let's think about this for a moment, and think about all the advanced weapons the government has. they would own us at war.

but to even think that one day people will need guns to fight off an oppressive government is even nuttier than being a fundamentalist. our guns have done nothing but created crimes, death and suffering. we don't need guns to change our government, and all the greatest changes to our government have been brought through peaceful walks, peaceful speeches, peaceful demonstrations. and I am not trying to lighten how difficult that was.

what do you think the result would be if King said "I have a dream, and in this dream we brothers rise up against our government in firey arms and unleash the bloody justice of Christ onto those white oppressive leaders!!"

our country would be sooooo fucked up if that happened. no positive change comes through guns. just look at our aggressive attemps in the middle east. as others have said, you can't gun point freedom.

GET OUT OF THE STONE AGE!!

this is the information age!! change comes through informing the ignorant.

Originally Posted by juroara

do you really think a gun is going to save you from the government? what backwards cave man logic is that?

Save me? Perhaps, and perhaps not, but it is the principles that are important here.

let's think about this for a moment, and think about all the advanced weapons the government has. they would own us at war

That depends on many things. If there were enough of us armed, they would not stand a chance of winning short of annihilating us. The government would never get into a full scale war with it's citizens over this issue anyhow. As I have said before it is not about war, it is about the gun being a symbol of the balance of power.

but to even think that one day people will need guns to fight off an oppressive government is even nuttier than being a fundamentalist.

So you are saying that weapons are useless in war essentially. Revolutions were fought with what then?

our guns have done nothing but created crimes, death and suffering. we don't need guns to change our government, and all the greatest changes to our government have been brought through peaceful walks, peaceful speeches, peaceful demonstrations. and I am not trying to lighten how difficult that was.

Guns helped to forge this country; and guns defended it many times.

Peaceful means have their place, as Gandhi proved, but he would have been gassed without sympathy by the Nazi party. The point being that violence has it's place as well.

what do you think the result would be if King said "I have a dream, and in this dream we brothers rise up against our government in firey arms and unleash the bloody justice of Christ onto those white oppressive leaders!!"

See above.

our country would be sooooo fucked up if that happened. no positive change comes through guns. just look at our aggressive attemps in the middle east. as others have said, you can't gun point freedom.

GET OUT OF THE STONE AGE!!

this is the information age!! change comes through informing the ignorant.

Thank you. I will put down my club and learn to read starting now.

juroara, please watch this video:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/s..._violence.html

It is quite obvious that violence has decreased prodigiously since the advent of the gun. I'm not saying that this is because of the gun, but it is strong evidence for guns maybe not being so bad. As for you fantasy of a government not becoming tyrannical, I refer you to Never's post.

Originally Posted by juroara

our forefathers wanted us the right to bare arms so we can fight an oppressive government. but come one people! this is 2008! times have changed

So you're saying that just because our government hasn't oppressed us yet, that it never will. Thats very dangerous thinking.

As for the rest of your post...Look. I am in the Army. I know what we can and can't do, to a limit. If Iraq and Afghanistan are giving us such a hard time, I GUARANTEE you an American insurgency would be 10 times worse or more. Our Army, Marines, Air Force, and Navy could NEVER take on the American civilian population. NEVER. And its because we can own weapons.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

So you're saying that just because our government hasn't oppressed us yet, that it never will. Thats very dangerous thinking.

As for the rest of your post...Look. I am in the Army. I know what we can and can't do, to a limit. If Iraq and Afghanistan are giving us such a hard time, I GUARANTEE you an American insurgency would be 10 times worse or more. Our Army, Marines, Air Force, and Navy could NEVER take on the American civilian population. NEVER. And its because we can own weapons.

Indeed. And also, the biggest trump card you have in fighting wars overseas is the nuke, but that can't be used within the US because they'd be shitting in their own backyard. Although, I won't rule out a nuke being used once as a sort of Reichstag incident.

The fact that the US can toss nukes around like candy if it wanted to isn't what makes it a threat overseas, it has the most powerful, expensive military force. The artillery is what does it, not just that we have tanks but that we have more, better tanks than any particular enemy. As far as who could fight for longest, especially without going bankrupt, or who could respond to a problem fastest, the top force differs (China, Israel).

Within the US, though, the US military can still use its tanks, airplanes and all that expensive artillery to suppress a revolt or just downwright become a fascist dictatorship.

While those tanks would be a bitch, a counter insurgency would fail HARD in the US. The only thing they can do is slowly take away our rights so we don't even notice until it's too late, and rule by fear. If they try to rule by force instead of fear, it'd be warfare from harlem to washington heights. They'd be fuxed, USA would have the most impossible insurgency ever encountered. Think about it, in the ghetto people are already training against each other in guerrilla warfare. All those thugs that used to shoot each other are going to unite together and form an army of vicious motherfuckers.

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

While those tanks would be a bitch, a counter insurgency would fail HARD in the US. The only thing they can do is slowly take away our rights so we don't even notice until it's too late, and rule by fear. If they try to rule by force instead of fear, it'd be warfare from harlem to washington heights. They'd be fuxed, USA would have the most impossible insurgency ever encountered. Think about it, in the ghetto people are already training against each other in guerrilla warfare. All those thugs that used to shoot each other are going to unite together and form an army of vicious motherfuckers.

You don't seem to understand how revolutions work. The longer and slower the buildup, the more violent the revolution is. At some the population being oppressed has a reality check. No failed fascist regime in history was ever not toppled by violent revolution.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

No point really, other than to agree with you.

Ah, took it the wrong way.