steo on 18/4/2007 at 23:52
Quote Posted by fett
steo - stop being a fucktard, I said it was a shitty analogy.
I wasn't being a fucktard and slagging off your analogy, I was merely pointing out that, even with all the guns the US populace can legally own, they still won't be a whole lot better off fighting an oppressive government than without them.
Taffer, I must say I agree with user123abc. In the event of a foreign invasion of the US there would be considerable notice before any ground fighting would take place due to the navy and air force. If and when the military and police run short of manpower, you introduce the draft. Failing that, I see no good reason why you can't store enough
military grade weaponry for every able bodied person in a bunker somewhere ready to be issued in the extremely unlikely event that it is necessary. Not only would fully automatic weapons with full size magazines be more effective than civilian grade weaponry, you wouldn't have nearly the same problem with gun crime that you do now. The need to produce all those assault rifles would also at least lessen the blow to the arms industry from banning civilian firearms. Militia duty works in Switzerland, even though most of them think its a pain in the arse to have to go to training camp once a year.
Oh and
Quote Posted by Taffer_Boy_Elvis
I can't help it that I'm intelligent enough to form an opinion without criticizing everyone else's, and name calling.
get that SKS out your arse for a moment please.
Gingerbread Man on 18/4/2007 at 23:57
I can't imagine how big a bunker you'd need to store enough gear for 300 million people.
TBE on 19/4/2007 at 00:06
Yeah, we're buying guns and ammo for everyone. Canadians, come down here while the sale is on. Getcher guns riiiiight here.
I'll get my SKS outta my ass when you get your head out of yours thank you very much. I quite actually like this debate when people don't actually name call and belittle everyone's opinion. But your argument skills break down to saying my opinion is shit, and your opinion must be the ONLY way in the world we could ever go on as a society.
Do I tell you that you need to get your Utopian society out of your ass, because your opinion is wrong? No, you have valid points that I just may agree upon, but what's the sense in playing fair if you're not willing to do the same? Do I have any valid points you agree on?
Gingerbread Man on 19/4/2007 at 00:06
Quote:
You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today... but you decided to spill my blood.
You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option.
The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off.
You just love to crucify me. You loved inducing cancer in my head, terrors in my heart and ripping my soul all this time.
I didn't have to do this. I could have left. I could have fled.
But now I will no longer run. It's not for me, for my children, for my brothers and sisters, the (bleeped). I did it for them.
Why are the oversensitive flowerbois always the ones? This shit reads like a straight-out emo retard's mySpace.
Oh wait.
Scots Taffer on 19/4/2007 at 00:07
I wonder what point he's trying make exactly amongst his rants about it all being "their fault" (who? the media? the world at large?), he clearly made the decision some time ago to go on this murderous rampage, is he trying to say that he was trying to be stopped and left a trail of clues everywhere? In any case, it's still all very fucking sad.
Oh shit, GBM, now I expect a myspace "suicide" type YTMND to show up
within an hour
ago using the emo "How could this happen to me" track. (
http://choseung-huiisemo.ytmnd.com/) ffs
User123abc on 19/4/2007 at 00:19
It sounds more like metal than emo.
You could argue that essentially he's right. Clearly at some point the cruel and opressive forces of society greatly wronged this guy, thus making him shoot his friends.
I'm not sure if I'm being sarcastic or not. It's an actual argument and I assume part of the reason we still have the insanity defense. Anyway, the real culprit is video games.
Gingerbread Man on 19/4/2007 at 00:26
The real culprit was a pussy Korean with a couple of handguns. Nothing and no one else.
paloalto on 19/4/2007 at 00:37
The framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were quite aware that it is the nature of govermnent no matter what the period of time your talking about to evolve into a more centralized and more powerful entity.This included debates about central banking and checks and balances in areas of government to prevent it.That doesn't disappear because technology changes.
The fact that you would not even mount a resistence nor want the means to do so even given the odds tells me you take your freedoms for granted.Ghandi's peaceful resistence worked in India because the British even though they were an alien power had a code of conduct within their society.Try that against Hitler.Don't think so.
As far as a resistence chances,the conflicts in the Middle East shows the shortcomings of air power and armor in urban warfare.You have a large geographical area with many potential pockets of resistence.If you have guns that means the military has to at least put assests up to engage it or to remove those guns in order to gain control.I think the chances would be pretty good.
From a human point of view there are only three situations in which violence is justified.
To defend yourself or another.
To free yourself from tyranny.
and to preserve the freedom and rights that you have.
Maybe you should try living in a country with no rights for a while to see if they are worth fighting for.
I'm not well versed enough in law to know where the local police would stand if a dictatorship would take over the U.S.
Starrfall on 19/4/2007 at 00:40
I never thought of that.I think you're on to something.
