Coach Tuesday Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 So can you, even in a broad general sense, explain how gun prohibition would be implemented? It would be messy as hell, I'll admit. A combination of cash incentives and strict penalties I suppose. Gotta start somewhere.
GG Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 No, because the benefits of air travel outweigh the social costs of occasional tragedies. Personally I don't see the benefits of guns, at all. I really do not accept the premise that private gun ownership is a check on government. I think it's a compete fiction. As I said earlier, democratic countries with strict gun control don't experience massacres by their governments against unarmed citizens. The self protection extends beyond a government massacres.
Coach Tuesday Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 The self protection extends beyond a government massacres. That's too vague for me. In any event, I also prefer a small, emasculated government. No guns, little teeny government.
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 It would be messy as hell, I'll admit. A combination of cash incentives and strict penalties I suppose. Gotta start somewhere. So you support a law that would be messy as hell, expensive, put a number of otherwise law abiding citizens ln prison, require revoking one of the bill of rights as a "start? Sounds good where do I sign up?
GG Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 That's too vague for me. In any event, I also prefer a small, emasculated government. No guns, little teeny government. Self defense, self protection for unlawful searches, invasion of private property. While it's a noble thought that you support a smaller government, the trend has been in the opposite. While it may seem unthinkable that the US government may turn on its citizens, the protections provided by 2nd amendment are just as important as the first, and we an certainly point to more tangible evidence where broad interpretations of the first amendment over the years have watered down societal norms and contribute to the depravity.
Adam Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 Self defense, self protection for unlawful searches, invasion of private property. While it's a noble thought that you support a smaller government, the trend has been in the opposite. While it may seem unthinkable that the US government may turn on its citizens, the protections provided by 2nd amendment are just as important as the first, and we an certainly point to more tangible evidence where broad interpretations of the first amendment over the years have watered down societal norms and contribute to the depravity. If you think you should pull a gun on a cop who is unlawfully searching your home, you are wrong.
GG Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 If you think you should pull a gun on a cop who is unlawfully searching your home, you are wrong. Think about that statement for a second.
....lybob Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 If you think you should pull a gun on a cop who is unlawfully searching your home, you are wrong. You are not wrong you just won't win
Adam Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 You are not wrong you just won't win In that case you are wrong. You get a lawyer and take care of it. Most often you'd want to get the heck out of there, because you probably are dealing with a renegade, to begin with.
....lybob Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 In that case you are wrong. You get a lawyer and take care of it. Most often you'd want to get the heck out of there, because you probably are dealing with a renegade, to begin with. Why do you think you'll get a fair shake in court?, if you don't understand that we have a two-tier legal system then you're not keeping up.
Adam Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 Why do you think you'll get a fair shake in court?, if you don't understand that we have a two-tier legal system then you're not keeping up. You have a better chance at a good result. Pull a gun on a cop and the only possible result will be a bad one.
....lybob Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 You have a better chance at a good result. Pull a gun on a cop and the only possible result will be a bad one. True, direct confrontation against tyrannical abuse is likely to harm your health, property, and reputation- someone should have told the founding fathers
Adam Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 True, direct confrontation against tyrannical abuse is likely to harm your health, property, and reputation- someone should have told the founding fathers Yes, and vigilantes get far these days. If a cop is unlawfully searching your place, they are trespassing and probably crazy. But no good will come of pulling a gun on a cop. Try it and see what happens.
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) In that case you are wrong. You get a lawyer and take care of it. Most often you'd want to get the heck out of there, because you probably are dealing with a renegade, to begin with. What if he won't let you get the heck out of there? Edited December 16, 2012 by Jim in Anchorage
Koko78 Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) We should repeal all of the Bill of Rights as well as the 14th Amendment. Afterall, we need free speech, the right to assemble, the right to a free press, etc. as much as we need to have guns. The gubment is always right, why do we need to have the right to speak out about it? That's what our elected officials are for, to take complaints and do stuff for us. We certainly don't need militias either. We have the gubment to provide military protection. If we have nothing to hide, we certainly don't need to worry about the gubment searching our homes without reason. If there isn't anything there, there's nothing for them to find. Similarly, if people are innocent, they should be compelled to testify if they're criminally charged. There's nothing to fear from being on the witness stand if you're innocent; only if you're guilty. The truth will set you free! We also don't need speedy public trials if we didn't do anything, as well as the right to some slimeball lawyer representing us. Just as we don't need to have the right to arm ourselves, we just don't need these other pesky rights. Edited December 16, 2012 by Koko78
Adam Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 We should repeal all of the Bill of Rights as well as the 14th Amendment. Afterall, we need free speech, the right to assemble, the right to a free press, etc. as much as we need to have guns. The gubment is always right, why do we need to have the right to speak out about it? That's what our elected officials are for, to take complaints and do stuff for us. We certainly don't need militias either. We have the gubment to provide military protection. If we have nothing to hide, we certainly don't need to worry about the gubment searching our homes without reason. If there isn't anything there, there's nothing for them to find. Similarly, if people are innocent, they should be compelled to testify if they're criminally charged. There's nothing to fear from being on the witness stand if you're innocent; only if you're guilty. The truth will set you free! We also don't need speedy public trials if we didn't do anything, as well as the right to some slimeball lawyer representing us. Just as we don't need to have the right to arm ourselves, we just don't need these other pesky rights. Ok, I, sure we'll be repealing all of that. Wonderful idea.
Koko78 Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 Ok, I, sure we'll be repealing all of that. Wonderful idea. Why not? We don't need those rights. The government will provide for us.
Adam Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 Why not? We don't need those rights. The government will provide for us. Sure.
....lybob Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 We should repeal all of the Bill of Rights as well as the 14th Amendment. Afterall, we need free speech, the right to assemble, the right to a free press, etc. as much as we need to have guns. The gubment is always right, why do we need to have the right to speak out about it? That's what our elected officials are for, to take complaints and do stuff for us. We certainly don't need militias either. We have the gubment to provide military protection. If we have nothing to hide, we certainly don't need to worry about the gubment searching our homes without reason. If there isn't anything there, there's nothing for them to find. Similarly, if people are innocent, they should be compelled to testify if they're criminally charged. There's nothing to fear from being on the witness stand if you're innocent; only if you're guilty. The truth will set you free! We also don't need speedy public trials if we didn't do anything, as well as the right to some slimeball lawyer representing us. Just as we don't need to have the right to arm ourselves, we just don't need these other pesky rights. What Militia do you belong to?
Recommended Posts