by Gregor 174 Replies latest social current
Provided they form militas, that is...
Don't forget the well regulated part !
Which begs the question. What is the point to fighting a depot, if he has regulated your miltia against any possiblity of doing it ?
(I.E the National Guard as it stands today.)
really? the freedom to what? the freedom to have to worry about being blown away by some fool who has easy access to guns.
SLH,
Im sorry man but your comments in this thread have bordered on... no are totally irrational.
Your fear of firearms is irrational. I have always lived in a place where easy access to firearms is the norm and have never once feared being blown away.
The FBI lists many major contributing factors to violent crime in their 1997 FBI Uniform Crime Report.
As for the declining violent crime rate over the last several years:
"There is, at present, little consensus among criminologists, legal analysts and law enforcement officials about the explanation or causes of the decrease. Possible explanations include: increase in the incarceration rate; community based policing; changes in drug markets; aging of the criminal population; and cyclical trends in the homicide rate." (Conference announcement: Why is Crime Decreasing, Northwestern University School of Law).
Might be because the trouble makers had jobs and didn't need to be violent to make a living
really? the freedom to what? the freedom to have to worry about being blown away by some fool who has easy access to guns.
What about pool owers I am more worried about an accident with the pool in my back yard than the dozen or more guns in my house.
By your logic we should ban pools. Their are way more pool, boat, or lake accidents each year let's ban acces to all of them.
brother apostate
Well, as an arch user of bad stats, being wrong is what you'd know about, but in this case you are right as I muddled father and son.
Pity you'll never admit to the distortion of facts those stats you posted make. I wonder what form of high five you'll give yourself in your signature this time?
Your attempt to mirror the phrasing of the 2nd Ammendement with another topic fails as you fail to take into accuont the persistent connection bewteen millitas and the second ammendment. A better example would be;
"A well-educated electorate being necessary to the preservation of a free society, the right of the people to access books in a public library without charge shall not be infringed."
This states a goal (education and a free society) and gies a means (free public libraries), but does not mean peope should have all books for free, just as the 2nd ammendment gives a goal (security of the state) and gves a means (milita and access to arms), but does not mean people whould have free access to arms.
5go
I'm glad your humour is similar to mine in some respects :-)
Which begs the question. What is the point to fighting a depot, if he has regulated your miltia against any possiblity of doing it ?
No, I find why Americans need guns to overthrow tyrants when Eastern Europe did it without a far more interesting question, but no takers yet.
No one is going to give me examples of when gun-owners HAVE actually 'protected freedoms' by using guns against the government... so 30,000 die a year as a result of a freedom that no one has used, nor is ever likely to. Not very pragmatic is it? Oh, there was Waco, but he was a Whako...
Still no one interested in actually discussing the root cause of American violence?
Still no one going to accept IF there was a majority of Americans in favour of reform of gun control, the 2nd Amendment could be struck down if the politicians acted in line with itheir constituent's desires?
No one gonna talk about the lingusitic differentiation between 'the People' and terms refering to individuals?
Don't worry, it's human nature to avoid the topics that show up how weak one's argument is... ;-)
And as far as I knew pool were not designed with the primary purpose of killing, so your apples and elephnats comparison lets you down.
Still no one interested in actually discussing the root cause of American violence?
Ya I will abba but I got to go at the moment.
Is American violence different from European violence? Or do you want to rephrase your question?
Good point IP; I'm gonna start this as another thread with a clearer development of the thought; http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/15/133292/1.ash
And as far as I knew pool were not designed with the primary purpose of killing, so your apples and elephnats comparison lets you down.
For law abiding citizens: The primary purpose of guns is as a crime deterrent, self defense, target shooting, and hunting.
The primary purpose of guns for the military is offensive and defensive strategy in warfare.
The primary purpose of guns for criminals is to instill coercive fear in their victims to cooperate with said criminal's desires.
So, no, killing is not the primary purpose of guns- certainly not in the way it relates to the topic under discussion.
Second Amendment:"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Analogous statement:
A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the preservation of a free society, the right of the people to read and compose books shall not be infringed.
Disparate statement:
A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the preservation of a free society, the right of the people to access books in a public library without charge shall not be infringed.
Which more closely resembles the second amendment? The founding fathers did not have the idea of access to a gun depot (library), but rather the right to keep(possess at one's dwelling) and bear (maintain, exercise use of) Arms.
Further, "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" tells us that this was a pre-existing, well accepted and well acknowledged right, as it still is.
Now, you can play around with legalistic mumbo-jumbo and mental masturbation if you desire, but the Second Amendment is not going to see alteration or repeal, because too many US citizens understand why it exists, and what taking it away would mean. Nobody wants to go there, for all the right reasons.
BA- The facts (not "bad statistics"), and just the facts, please.
I, for one want to thank you Brother Apostate for your research, well-thought out presentations, and pure logic on this issue. Your last paragraph says it all:
Now, you can play around with legalistic mumbo-jumbo and mental masturbation if you desire, but the Second Amendment is not going to see alteration or repeal, because too many US citizens understand why it exists, and what taking it away would mean. Nobody wants to go there, for all the right reasons.
Journey-On,
Thanks, I appreciate your kind words.
Many who leave the dubs never research the issues they were kept in the dark about as a dub.
Cheers,
BA
