It's encouraging to see members like you and others on this forum who share and understand the true essence of what our forefathers intended while framing the constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrendaQG
Printable View
It's encouraging to see members like you and others on this forum who share and understand the true essence of what our forefathers intended while framing the constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrendaQG
Now come on Brenda. Do you really think the three separate branches of the military are waiting in the wings to take over the instant the populace is disarmed? Do you really believe that “our rights are ONLY guaranteed by the implied threat” of our civilian arms? I know Tom seems to be arguing for a stronger case than I. I’m not against people owning firearms. I’m not saying a degradation and collapse of the U.S. government can never happen. But to contend that our current political stability is due ONLY to the threat of armed civilians is a misrepresentation that does us a disservice. Not only is it silly but it’s irresponsible to recommend that we all now arm ourselves for sake of political stability.
It’s also a bit disingenuous (don’t you think?) to claim:
Quote:
While I for one can see their points they cannot see ours.
I think Tom,Oli and I and others see and understand your arguments perfectly well. I don’t doubt that you understand Tom’s positions and arguments as well as mine (though I am beginning to doubt whether InHouston does). We do disagree on the weight that should be accorded various propositions. You claim to think Zimbabwe can happen here, next month. That it’s only armed civilians keeping the coup at bay. I understand those points. I just think they’re way overplayed and outlandishly overstated.
InHouston intimates:
http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...hlight=#497011Quote:
... guns are still primarily operate with a bullet, powder, and an igniting charge just like in days of our founding fathers. This is an obvious case of someone providing extensive analysis on a subject matter they have little or 'no hands-on' experience with at all.
http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...hlight=#497293
Sorry, but it just doesn't add up. Since you, so you say, hunted and lived in those communities, I find it difficult to understand the comments you made about hunting being so dangerous. Seems to me that you’re exaggerating your experience with firearms. Okay you could shoot an aspirin tablet at 50 yards with a .22. That’s what kids do. Sounds to me like you accompanied your father on hunting trips as a child, but have little hands-on experience with, and in-depth knowledge of guns. That fact is gleaned by the ignorant comments you make. You sound just like people who have limited experience with firearms.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
It is what it is. Personally, I think you’re bullshitting everyone on this.
ArmedInHouston slurged:
' This is an obvious case of someone providing extensive analysis on a subject matter they have little or 'no hands-on' experience with at all.'
Along with growing up around rural sportsmen, I have also fired live rounds with my University OTC.
It is not guns that frighten me. People with guns frighten me, and I do not think there are enough responsible people out there to warrant allowing firearms.
The nutjob psychopath is only a nutjob psychopath AFTER he's shot up a bus.
Until then, he's just another 'law-abiding' citizen.
Your weopons will not save you from this dreaded home invasion you all seem to be living in fear of. All it will do is ratch up the violence level of the situation.
So in your mind, the right to carry a pistol is equal to the right to practice your own religion, sleep with who you want to, and choose what happens to your own body?Quote:
Originally Posted by BrendaQG
Brenda, you are a goldmine.
And people who like to slam people's heads in car doors should definitely not be allowed near a loaded gun when they get their psych on!!!!!!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock:
What a joke. How does growing up around rural sportsmen give you experience with firearms? Training gives you experience. So, you fired live rounds in your ROTC program in college. Whoop-tee-fucking-doo man. I bet you only had to do that once to qualify for some lame-ass extra credit in your course. This only confirms my point that you don't know what you're talking about. I train twice a week at a defensive combat shooting range, expending 200 to 500 “live rounds” a week, and have been for years now. That averages out to around 19, 000 “live rounds” a year that I fire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfurbs
As far as your opinions on home invasions that "we all seem to be living in fear of" and that “our guns can't save us from”. Well ... I'll tell you this ... come kick in my door uninvited. You'll get two in your chest and one in your grape, and I will happily toss your hemoraging ass out on the front lawn for the coroner to pick up. And there isn’t a court in this state that will convict me for it either, because I was in the right, it’s the law, and that’s just the way it is … wimp. You have a victim mentality. That’s your problem, not mine.
People like you armed?
You bet I'm scared.
Good ... you should be. I sleep better at night knowing you're scared and that you wouldn't dare try to commit a crime against me, which is exactly what the 2nd amendment is for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfurbs
I don't commit crimes.
A criminal is not going to be put off however.
What worries me is you getting drunk, deciding to play with your little guns and letting a round off that kills your neighbour's son.
But you're 'responsible', and you shoot 10000000000000 rounds a day with your buddies, so that will never happen of course.
Gee, I sleep pretty well in spite of the fact that the dangerous Tomfurbs is out there...somewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
lmao
Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
A democracy or republic rarely becomes all at once in a big coup. It does what it did in Wiemar Germany, or Republican Rome. It is a slow creep over years or generations. Slowly a free people sacrifice a right here, a villagers there, all for the sake of security or money. Then somewhere down the road comes Ceasar and his legions and instead of being opposed by the people they are welcomed as they cross the Rubicon. So starts the events that lead to the total acceptance of virtual one man rule by Octavian Augustus, who kept up a fiction of republican rule, and called himself "Princeps" and "Imperator"...."First citizen" and "War Leader". (Sounds allot like our president's titles dosen't it?)
{In between now and then we have revolutionary non monarchic France going from a republic of sorts to becoming a Bonaparte Empire over continental western Europe.}
In the German case allot of the powers Hitler had when he first became Chancellor were already granted to that office through the actions of past chancellors or Wiemar Germany. His party did not have control of the Riechstag until after a fire destroyed their building.... which was blamed on the Communist party as a terrorist attack.... From there Hitler got the powers of the President as well as Chancellor and a open ended decaration of emergency powers.... That is what created the Third Riech. Not the army but the legislature voting it into existence!
That is what the second amendment keeps from happening here in the United Sates of America. Not some pie in the sky thing that has never happened in the past but something that has happened time and again in free democratic socitities where the people were not armed.
The average life span of republics and democracies is hisrotically about 240 years ( The roman republic lasted about 450 years, Wiemar germany about 20 the rest fall in between.) Where the populace was not armed and not accustomed to freedom. The USA has been around longer than that average. If we are to outlast as a republic even the majesty of Rome we need to keep and bear arms as a people. As a symbol of our collective freedom, rights, and responsibilities as Citizens of the United States of America.
I think you will find that the reasons behind Hitler becoming Chancellor had a lot more to do with Britain and France's policies towards Germany in 1918 than with a populace denied access to guns.
Try reading "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer. Your grasp of Hitler's rise to power is tenuous.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrendaQG
And try Gibbon's "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", or Durant's "Caesar and Christ", they may help you understand understand why your statements about Caeser and the Roman people are pure bunk.
That may have been what it was intended for 219 years ago, but that definition doesn't fit anymore. That doesn't mean it has no import in the life of the Country now, but not as an armed check on governmental power. The introduction of a large standing army negated that idea.Quote:
That is what the second amendment keeps from happening here in the United Sates of America. Not some pie in the sky thing that has never happened in the past but something that has happened time and again in free democratic socitities where the people were not armed.
Quite true, but an unarmed populace certainly made it much easier for him to take over and made it impossible for the populace to get their country back - that is until after it was reduced to rubble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfurbs
The German people didn't want their country back. While they were not all National Socialists, the population was generally happy with their lot under Hitler and the Nazis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin
Given all the complex economic and political factors that come into play as an empire or a nation declines, factors that slowly erode away at the cohesiveness of the state over the generations (according to your own account, Brenda), then surely you must agree that an armed citizenry is not the ONLY thing that stands between the life and death of that political whole. A myriad of OTHER puzzle pieces stand in the way and need to (be) removed to precipitate or further the decline. That, at the very least, you must concede.
Moreover, an armed populace can sometimes have a quite deleterious effect on the health of a nation. The KKK was an armed subset of the populace and it was responsible for the suppression, torture and death of countless brave people. It wasn’t stopped by an armed populace…it was the populace armed. It wasn’t stopped by the military or the police. The KKK melted in its own shame as the press exposed it for what it was. FBI investigations, the American Courts and the movement for Civil Rights dissolved the clan into the rancid little vestige that’s left today.
The Nazi’s in Germany had a great deal of support among anti-Semitic civilians who armed themselves and took to the streets to confront and harass those not sympathetic to their black cause.
Civilian troops of young southern rebels fought treasonous battles against the United States of America so that southern gentlemen might continue to own slaves.
Before an armed citizenry can be of any use to the cause of democracy, the citizens have to want a democracy; and they have to know what a democracy is.
OK brenda what the fuck are you smoking this is my first post in this thread........And i like the idea of overturning the ban its a good thing for DC..i guess you have to live in the DMV area thats allQuote:
Originally Posted by BrendaQG
Happiness is a warm gun!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfurbs
double post
sorry luv, forgot. You belong on my "A" list as well! :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by justatransgirl
That is an awesome film, I have to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by iloveshemales77
Yes, I agree. Come to think of it, this one pertains to the subject at hand as well...
blah blah blah ....Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
PussyQuote:
Originally Posted by Tomfurbs
Quote:
blah blah blah ....
Is that the state of argument in Texas, or does the mental bankruptcy end with you, InHouston? Don't you have to go now and play toy soldier or something?Quote:
Pussy
Thanks to those two one-word posts, ArmeddrunkparanoidandguncrazedInHouton can consider his nutjob arse well and truly kicked.
Yessir!
Insults-for when your argument doesn't hold water.Quote:
Originally Posted by InHouston
http://bc.fotosearch.com/bigcomps/CR...15509-47dg.jpg
+ 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli
It is a fabulous book. Detailed, measured and engaging. I used it as source material for my first-year thesis.
Very fine book. Doubly so because it was published within 20 years of the events it describes.
Google and enter the following keywords "home invasion armed citizen"Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfurbs
I rest my case ... fucking moron.
here's a NY TIMES article on gun safty and children
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...5BC0A9629C8B63
And here are just a couple of recent news items:
another murder suicide performed with the home firearm that was to protect the family from armed intruders.
http://www.imperfectparent.com/topic...hicago-suburb/
and your everyday teenager killed by your everyday drive-by shooting. (InHouston, you might like to fantasize about how if he had gun he would have seen the car coming and pulled it out to heroically save himself and stop the perps.
http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2...hooting_2.html
So you are saying that the Nazis seizing all the personal weapons in Germany was not part of their power grab?
You sir are the one with a tenuous grasp of how the world works. IRL only lead, and steel guarantee rights and freedom, not papers and courts.
Consider the fact that a court order is nothing without armed police to enforce it. Then consider what it would be like if the Govt. in its infinite wisdom took away both the first amendment rights after they took away the second amendment right. You say they would never... Well after the populace is disarmed and assuming a totally loyal police and military who would stop them? Who, how, with what would such a power grab be stopped here? By green tea drinking liberals, writing poems, and using their mighty pen's. Get real.
It wasn't court orders that [helped] focus the attention of the nation on the KKK[?] It was shame that diminished their ranks and stopped their membership growth. Once the eye of the nation was on them, few wanted to have anything to do with KKK. The Civil Rights Movement was a triumph for unarmed, nonviolent metamorphosis of government.
If you haven't seen it recently, I urge readers to watch the film "Witness" with Harrison Ford. It illustrates the issues of non-violent witnessing and the use of firearms quite nicely.
Consider how an unarmed populace wrested India from Great Britain with non-violent protests and civil disobedience.
Brenda..you keep bringing up other factors that stand in the way of our nation's over throw, and yet you haven't retracted your claim that an armed citizenry is the ONLY thing that keeps the government stable. Don't you mean it's the ULTIMATE defense...the defense of LAST RESORT?
[quote="BrendaQG"]
IRL only lead, and steel guarantee rights and freedom, not papers and courts.
[quote]
The gift that keeps on giving.
There is a certain "Lord of the Flies" feel to that logic, isn't there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfurbs
Wait...your contradicting yourselfQuote:
Originally Posted by BrendaQG
So which was it, a power grab or legislative vote? Which party was the largest minority in the Reichstag before the fire? Which party was the largest minority after the fire (as no one had a majority)? When did Hitler assume the powers of the President? When exactly were the guns taken from the population?Quote:
Originally Posted by BrendaQG
That may be, but you won't find me spouting off on topics that I have only a cursory knowledge of. BTW, how many times did US Grant loses Presidential elections?Quote:
You sir are the one with a tenuous grasp of how the world works.
http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...31764&start=30
Without "paper and courts", you have no freedoms or rights. You have only the survival of the best armed and strongest. That is anarchy, not democracy.Quote:
IRL only lead, and steel guarantee rights and freedom, not papers and courts.
I would cite Trish' mention of India throwing off the yoke of the British, or the Russians, Latvians, Estonians, Germans, Slovaks, Czechs, Poles, Lithuanian or Ukrainians ending decades of Communist rule with hardly a shot fired.Quote:
Consider the fact that a court order is nothing without armed police to enforce it. Then consider what it would be like if the Govt. in its infinite wisdom took away both the first amendment rights after they took away the second amendment right. You say they would never... Well after the populace is disarmed and assuming a totally loyal police and military who would stop them? Who, how, with what would such a power grab be stopped here? By green tea drinking liberals, writing poems, and using their mighty pen's. Get real.
Were the people of Eastern Europe armed to the teeth? No.
Were the Indians? No.
Were the French peasants armed in 1789? No, just starving.
The reality is that "the gun issue" is only an issue to the gun nuts. Nobody else really cares.
You will care when they deny you the freedoms you now enjoy because of gun rights. One of my friends is from Brazil. He loves the fact that when a criminal brandishes a gun he can do the same. First you must realize that in his country people do have guns, but only the police who are no where to be found or criminals. In this country he can protect his mate. And not to mention that the best populace for a dictatorship is an un-armed one. People like you are going to be the death of this country. I have a saying. I was born in the USA but will die in the USSA.Quote:
Originally Posted by hippifried
You make it an issue when you refer to lawful gun owners as "gun nuts".Quote:
Originally Posted by hippifried