Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Banning assualt rifles Racist?????

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Nah, Callooh Callay, nation of men first, eh? The amendment was just an amendment. The document begins "We the People..."

    BS-87... yah, hmmmm....

    Can I ask yeh a question?

    Have yeh ever actually read Plato's Republic? Or for that matter, Brave New World, Island, or A Modern Utopia? Have yeh ever ventured into any of the other utopian novels? Thomas More, Francis Bacon, Edward Bellamy? B.F. Skinner? Perhaps some of the more modern sci-fi folks like James Hogan?

    Because, yeh see, none of 'em really proposes da cradle-to-grave-whatever nonsense that you mention. Not one. They're all much deeper, explorin' a lot of interestin' notions of how people and societies relate. Yeh should try readin' 'em again, if it's been a while.

    So my guess is you're gettin' that cradle-to-grave state nonsense from somewhere else. It's a bit of an amusing fiction, just because it's so much shallower than any of these other works, eh? Do yeh really want to associate with that?

    Tyranny is far more often created by revolution, eh? Da French Revolution ended in Napoleon, da Russian Revolution in Lenin and Stalin, China in Mao, Venezuela in Chavez, Cuba in Castro, Iran in da Ayatollahs, on and on, eh? Mostly, when revolutionary fervor occurs in a culture awash in weaponry, da result is a 3rd-world junta, eh? Just look at da sad histories of Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia. A minority opposition mostly gets slaughtered but often damages and sometimes destroys their country in da process.

    The ones you're thinking of - the rare exceptions - were all revolutions of hope, not fear. Da cornerstones of da revolutions were philosophical principles supported by social factors, not weapons. Washington & America, Gandhi and India, the mostly peaceful 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe and the like.

    Don't buy the crap someone is feedin' yeh. It's a bunch of malarkey.

    Beavah

    Comment


    • #32
      I'm looking at the world that a tyrant dreams of creating of of their own hubris and (very Platonic in philosophy) desire to do "good".

      If there's something I don't need a refresher on, it's the Republic. There's plenty there to aspire to. Even Ronald Reagan seems to hearken back to "the cave" in saying, It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they believe so many things that aren't so.

      What I think, though, is that Plato takes a little too much license in the Republic to create politics out of philosophy, which at its greatest in Platonic works end in aporia. This caused the abomination of the philosopher king and the noble lie to underlie a lot of western political thought. It helps justify the actions of socialists, and flies in the face of liberty.

      Comment


      • #33
        That men started without laws is not evidence of the superiority of that state.
        Yes, the amendment was "just" an amendment... to the Constitution of the United States of America. That isn't a statement of its unimportance.

        Focusing attention on how someone must not be as well read or wise as you because they are concerned about collectivist tendencies, is flattering to their concerns. Please continue to focus argument on the interlocutor's assumed ignorance and lack of thought that is apparently so serious that he must be admonished not to "buy the crap someone is feedin' yeh. It's a bunch of malarkey."


        (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

        Comment


        • #34
          Yeah, Beavah, Callooh! Callay! is right. It's actually pretty easy to come up with that kind of malarkey on their own. I should know...it's sprouting up all over this area right now. I'm fairly certain that most of the sprouts haven't read those authors even for the first time.

          Comment


          • #35
            Beavah, did you read 1984? It comes close I think...

            Then again, what do I know, all I could think of when I saw AWB was to "Pick Up The Pieces"...

            Comment


            • #36
              Thanks Calooh

              The point I was making isn't that Huxley's advocating a cradle to grave state. Neither did 1984. They actually both address statism as the issue, because the leaders have this notion that everyone is happy in their utopia. What they don't realize is that once people are free to learn what they're missing out on, they will never be satisfied by the "utopia". A good, real world example of a nation trying to be a utopia is North Korea.

              Comment


              • #37
                Yah, BS-87, I reckon yeh do need a refresher on Plato. But yeh do realize that all these things are works of fiction, right? In most cases, they aren't even really works of political theory or philosophy. Tryin' to defend yourself against da assault of a work of fiction seems a bit odd, don't yeh think?

                But since you're so afraid of statism, let me ask this. Why are yeh part of an organization that teaches children to pledge their allegiance to the state, and makes its mission an oath of duty to God and country? An organization that salutes da flag of the state at almost every gathering? That makes kids give up individual expression in favor of uniformity?

                Doesn't that seem a might contradictory? I mean, that's da sort of stuff kids in North Korea do! Even worse, Scouting is a worldwide movement and therefore must be part of da conspiracy to create a New World Order!!

                Aieeeee!!!!



                Comment


                • #38
                  First, ad hominem regarding my use of fictional works to justify feeling of malaise towards statism.

                  Second, a straw man equating patriotism and citizenship to being a willing slave of the state.

                  Third, a straw man using the nebulous NWO to make my concern with the power of governments seem ridiculous.

                  For shame Beavah. For shame.

                  Saul Alinsky would be proud though. You're pretty good at trying to shut people down that don't agree with you. The shame is in using logical fallacies to do so.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    The guys that defeated the British and the Hessians would have loved to have had an assault rifle with a 30 round magazine. The amendment was not written about hunting rifles.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Yah, sure, but da Continental Army would have really loved dynamite, RPGs, and attack helicopters too, eh? Are yeh sayin' those things are also covered by the 2nd Amendment?

                      Beavah

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Well, as you lawyers would say, "what is not expressly prohibited is permitted"...

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          One of the more effective "assault weapons" is a picker stick fitted with a bicycle grip on the small end. Yes, I have kept one in my car for years. It's perfectly legal. Well, most times.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Okay, putting on my moderator hat - the SCOTUS has determined that the 2nd amendment protects an individual's right to have a firearm even if they are not in a militia. They may also use that firearm for useful purposes such as shooting an intruder (in self-defense) in their home. They've also ruled that private citizens have no right to create their own militias or to own weapons for semi-military purposes - i.e. a "militia" is a government entity. The government may also regulate the concealment of arms and the age to which one may legally posess a gun (i.e. juveniles may be restricted the same as felons and mentally unstable folks because they pose a particular danger to the public).

                            In summary, the 2nd Amendment does not make it a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner for any purpose.

                            So, the debate as to what kind of weapons, types of ammunition, etc. to regulate are legitimate (i.e. constitutional) debates that may all take place without violating the 2nd Amendment.

                            As usual, the devil is alway in the details. (This message has been edited by acco40)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              "Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
                              George Washington
                              First President of the United States


                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              "The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
                              Thomas Paine


                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
                              Richard Henry Lee
                              American Statesman, 1788


                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              "The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
                              Patrick Henry
                              American Patriot

                              "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
                              George Mason
                              Co-author of the Second Amendment
                              during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788


                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves "
                              Richard Henry Lee
                              writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.


                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              "The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full posession of them."
                              Zachariah Johnson
                              Elliot's Debates, vol. 3 "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution."


                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              " the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms"
                              Philadelphia Federal Gazette
                              June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2
                              Article on the Bill of Rights


                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              "And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; "
                              Samuel Adams
                              quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

                              "Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
                              Sara Brady
                              Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum
                              The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                "The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot confirm their validity."--Abraham Lincoln

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X