Queue on 21/7/2010 at 18:50
Quote Posted by TBE
I'm still serving the country in the reserve forces. I don't do it for money. I do it for everyone in this country so they have their rights protected.
But, protection from who?
Now I'm in no way undermining or tying to make less important the work that those who "protect our rights" do, but this is a mantra that is stated so often--that this is being done to protect your rights--that I don't quite understand the meaning behind it anymore. Who, specifically, is threatening our Constitutional rights? Are there hordes amassed on the border I don't know about? Is it the French? I don't see the military walking the halls of Congress making sure the Constitution is upheld anytime soon, and the last time the National Guard was called in to put an end to a Constitutionally Protected gathering of Americans held on American soil, four students ended up dead in Ohio. I don't see that as protecting anyone's rights.
I know we are fighting this notion of Muslim Extremists who are plotting to destroy America, but do they threaten our Constitutional rights? Does anyone actually believe they can physically take over the country? Instead, the only thing they can do is incite fear, which in turn causes unrest and irrational behavior--something they have already done splendidly--but even the terrorist attacks did nothing to change our rights. Instead, our own government took away rights and changed our way of life. Where were those who "protect our rights" when this happened?
Any military action since the Civil War has not been to protect our constitutional rights, but to protect our interests.
Of the major conflicts:
-WWI: Was a purely European conflict in which America entered into in order to keep an Alliance
- WWII: Most of America was actually in favor of Hitler at the time. But going to war would be a boom to the economy, still struggling from the Great Depression, and the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor was an in. True, Japan had plans to attack America further, but to disable the military--not to threaten our way of life.
- Korea: were the North Koreans and Chinese going to come pouring across the border from Canada and take over Michigan?
- Vietnam: The Vietnamese
wanted Communism. That's why they installed Ho Chi Minh as their leader.
- Gulf War One: Saddam invaded Kuwait for oil, not Texas.
- Gulf War Two: Protecting America from terrorism starts with the CIA and FBI. Killing of Muslim extremist only further
their cause and convictions that America is the Great Satan and hellbent on altering
their way of life.
Our involvement in every one of these were to protect our interests or to maintain our alliances to prevent economic ramifications, not our rights. So please, in all seriousness and with all respect, explain to me how our rights are being threatened by foreign affairs? I have no idea, and wonder if those who say they are doing so fully understand the implications themselves.
Rug Burn Junky on 21/7/2010 at 19:17
Quote Posted by TBE
I don't agree with religious zealots who home school their children to be brain washed into their closed-mind culture, but yet, I will give my life in the defense of this country so they can do so. This is TBE's curriculum, like it or not.
While this is admirable, focusing on the primacy of the 2nd amendment among constitutional freedoms is virtually always a marker and badge of supreme and naive ignorance.
While the drafters' of the constitution fear of government tyranny is understandable given the zeitgeist of the late 18th century and then-recent history, and they were most likely correct in including it given the cultural vantage point which they held, it is now an anachronism. Its main intended purpose has been rendered entirely moot by the technological advances of the intervening centuries and the heterogeneous population of our current nation.
The likelihood of a government so tyrannical that armed rebellion is necessary is non-trivial, but so remote as to defy belief. Hell, we've mostly survived (knock on wood) the disastrous combination of nationalistic fear enabling a predatory chief executive branch that was the hallmark of the Bush administration. I would like to think that that's the worst it gets in my lifetime, though no doubt a legion of Tea-Partiers would prove me wrong if the nation ever does suffer from their rule.
More importantly, you're batshit insane if you think that even a plurality of fringetard militia members are going to do anything other than cause a shitload of unwarranted trouble for the rest of us reasonable members of society. Armed rebellion ceased to be a viable method of political change in the U.S. on the order of +/- 2 generations ago. Though a corporate sponsored coup run by Blackwater may stand a chance, I hardly think that this is what most people would have in mind when endorsing shit like "2nd amendment remedies."
The only purpose this argument serves is to legitimate the actions of the unstable elements of society who are unable to live peaceably amongst us, and feel the need to lash out for any perceived slights. You can not elevate the importance of the second amendment without tacitly justifying the actions of David Koresh and Timothy McVeigh - they are the necessary and logical outgrowth of that argument.
So yeah, its important that kids understand it, but it's also important that the ideas are contextualized. The fact that you jump to it in front of the more-relevant-in-modern-times freedoms of the Bill of Rights hardly inspires confidence that you've properly digested that context yourself.
CCCToad on 21/7/2010 at 23:17
Quote Posted by Queue
But, protection from who?
Any military action since the Civil War has not been to protect our constitutional rights, but to protect our interests.
Of the major conflicts:
-WWI: Was a purely European conflict in which America entered into in order to keep an Alliance
- WWII: Most of America was actually in favor of Hitler at the time. But going to war would be a boom to the economy, still struggling from the Great Depression, and the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor was an in. True, Japan had plans to attack America further, but to disable the military--not to threaten our way of life.
- Korea: were the North Koreans and Chinese going to come pouring across the border from Canada and take over Michigan?
- Vietnam: The Vietnamese
wanted Communism. That's why they installed Ho Chi Minh as their leader.
- Gulf War One: Saddam invaded Kuwait for oil, not Texas.
- Gulf War Two: Protecting America from terrorism starts with the CIA and FBI. Killing of Muslim extremist only further
their cause and convictions that America is the Great Satan and hellbent on altering
their way of life.
Our involvement in every one of these were to protect our interests or to maintain our alliances to prevent economic ramifications, not our rights. So please, in all seriousness and with all respect, explain to me how our rights are being threatened by foreign affairs? I have no idea, and wonder if those who say they are doing so fully understand the implications themselves.
Plus, you're forgetting a number of smaller "armed conflicts" where we agressed on weaker nations in order to make those ignorant savages see the light and do what we , the most enlightened, free, and smartest nation in the world, know is in their best interest. If only they were smart enough to realize it, we wouldn't have been forced to correct their ways. (see: the neocon philosophy of "spreading democracy").
On the second amendment: I actually like it alot more than I did before. I've moved from area where guns were numerous but crime nonexistant, to a town where most weapons are illegal and crime is sky high(only here for a few months, thank god). I know I'm committing the unforgivable sin of thinking from an individaul perspective rather than "the good of all society", but I feel much more comfortable knowing that I have the tools and skills to kill anyone who attempts to do so to me or my friends. Even assuming that a ban was 100% effective( and not as effective as, say, the ban on weed), I have a much better chance outnumbered in a gunfight than outnumbered in a knife fight.
Finally, its a mistake to think that dissatisfaction at the emergence of an untouchable, secretive elite is restricted only to tea partiers: (
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/07/19/secrecy/index.html)
TBE on 21/7/2010 at 23:24
Protection from nobody Queue. The reason there isn't anyone is the fact that we have a strong active and reserve military. I understand that the military is protecting US interests primarily.
Naïve RBJ? I may be a bit. I don't focus on the 2nd amendment in my life, I just feel it is extremely important. The gun ownership debate will never resolve on TTLG, I've seen it go awry too many times. I don't think there will be any coups in our government, nor those in most of the world. But for those who don't know history, are doomed to repeat it. The only thing constant in this world is change. What happens if terrorists get ahold of several dozen nuclear missiles and launch them upon the free world? The life after something like that would be hard on people without arms to hunt, defend themselves, etc. You cannot plan on our modern society to always be the way it is. Have a backup plan just in case.
P.S. I just bought a Benelli shotgun to support the Italian economy. ;)
Vivian on 21/7/2010 at 23:32
Quote Posted by CCCToad
I have a much better chance outnumbered in a gunfight than outnumbered in a knife fight.
You twerp. Do you honestly worry about getting into a fucking shoot-out? Two of you hiding behind barrels and taking pot shots at each other? You know what I worry about being good at? Maths. Because unlike fucking gunfighting, its actually likely that I'll be in situations where maths is a useful skill. Gah. Oh yeah and TBE talk about taking daydreams too far. If you can tell me that you have a gun just in case fallout happens with a straight face I'd be impressed. If you get nuked it's either pretty much business as normal after a few years (Japan, after all) or you get incinerated or die of radiation poisoning. The world doesn't turn back into the old west.
You know what I think is a good reason to have a gun? Because you like guns and you like shooting stuff. I can respect that, I used to like shooting arrows at stuff, it's fun to test your skills and it feels thrillingly powerful to put a hole in something at a distance. But all this stuff about needing them and them being vitally important to your wellbeing... Well, I haven't heard a convincing argument for that yet. All this vague bollocks about the apocalypse or needing to survive gun battles must strike you as a little far fetched, no?
CCCToad on 21/7/2010 at 23:32
Quote Posted by TBE
P.S. I just bought a Benelli shotgun to support the Italian economy. ;)
wise choice of brands.
Rug Burn Junky on 22/7/2010 at 04:45
Quote Posted by TBE
Naïve RBJ? I may be a bit.
More than a bit: it has no practical importance.
Mind you, that says nothing about the extent of the right, which is another conversatione ntirely, and one that I'm tremendously sympathetic to (probably surprisingly so). But singling it out as "important" shows that no matter how many platitudes you spout about "knowing history" it's plainly obvious that you don't
understand history.
Tocky on 22/7/2010 at 05:07
The only use I have for my pump 12 is clearing limbs from blocking satelite signals these days but I have fond memories of dove hunts past. Stitch will never be able to visit anyone in the south. :(
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
Though a corporate sponsored coup run by Blackwater may stand a chance, I hardly think that this is what most people would have in mind when endorsing shit like "2nd amendment remedies."
Not a chance then because the corporate boys have Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity and any number of other shills to control the weak minded with the all anti Obama all the time channels. You know O is stomping on the constitution by forcing us to have health care right? I mean, it's not like we are required to buy car insurance already or anything right? That cruel bastard wanting us to have health care equal to the failed systems of Canada and England. NO joke. They call those failed systems.
You know what is a fail? One of my nephews went to the Oxford hospital complaining of numbness on one side and had one dilated pupil. The ER folks take his money and the doc sends him home because he doesn't have insurance. You don't have to know medicine to know one dilated pupil signals brain damage and they sent him home. The next day he was paralyzed on one side. Well duh. He is now on the road to recovery thanks to Baptist Memphis but I'm encouraging him to teach the Oxford hospital the cost of ignoring the hipocratic oath with compassionate conservatism.
And shame on yall making fun of me and mons whacking. We just went all the way is all.
Christ that look on jizzpants guys face. That is hilarious.
TBE on 22/7/2010 at 09:22
Oh, I understand history RBJ. I just don't spout out every example you'd like to hear right now. You'll find 90% of my library are books of non-fiction, and of those, about 80% are history. Mostly American history to be honest with you. I fully understand America was formed by greedy colonists who grew tired of sending their hard earned money and products far away. It had almost nothing to do about taxation without representation, which is usually one of the biggest things focused on by public education. Minor issue there, but still ticked off enough peeps.
History I'm talking about in this thread though is more of being prepared history.
September 11th, 2001. We weren't prepared. How can you prepare for something unknown? You cannot. Now, however, if a group of whomever tries to stand up and take over an airliner, they're probably going to get an ass whooping from able-bodied men and women. We learned from history. We will not stand by on an airplane and let people do as they want.
December 7th, 1941. We weren't prepared. A day that will live in infamy. No longer will something like this happen to the US.
Hurricane Katrina. We weren't prepared. In the aftermath amidst the confusion, thugs had their way with people who were unarmed. If there's a natural disaster in my region, people won't be making their way into my house to steal my food or water. I have two close-quarter firearms and know how to use them well. I have food and water storage for just such an emergency. I have the ability to operate in a nuclear/biological/chemical environment. Worst case scenario, right?
Now I'm not envisioning a zombie apocalypse or a day-after/nuclear winter scenario, but I'm saying this: Be prepared. If you're prepared for the worst, you can cruise by swiftly in day to day life in our normal society as it is now. One of the things that is common to a lot of these things I've brought up is the ability to defend yourself.
DDL on 22/7/2010 at 09:56
I have images of heavily armed office people shooting out the windows of the WTC and laughing maniacally as they shoot down incoming passenger jets, now.
"DON'T MESS WITH 'MERICA, BITCHES!"
All of your examples work exactly the same whether people are armed or not, and the katrina example actually gets WORSE if everyone is armed.
