Page 29 of 31 FirstFirst ... 19262728293031 LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 302
  1. #281
    Quote Originally Posted by Wickabee View Post
    You assume where I live equals what I know. It does not. That is quite a silly thing to think. So everything surrounding this fallacy is completely irrelevant. There. I said it. Again.
    Sure it does because if you said if the gov't secided to do something your guns wouldn't help because it would be over before it started. This is not the truth in any matter. You just keep flip flopping and calling me crazy because I dont want to get tossed into a gas chamber. Hitler also used gun control to do this.

    And again you have failed to address how law breakers dont have an advantage while you pile up red tape because thats all you are saying to do.

  2. #282
    Quote Originally Posted by indexed View Post
    Sure it does because if you said if the gov't secided to do something your guns wouldn't help because it would be over before it started. This is not the truth in any matter. You just keep flip flopping and calling me crazy because I dont want to get tossed into a gas chamber. Hitler also used gun control to do this.

    And again you have failed to address how law breakers dont have an advantage while you pile up red tape because thats all you are saying to do.

    He did not. The reason the Jews were killed wasn't because Hitler had taken their guns away from them

  3. #283


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,378
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    And you don't stand a chance against a drone. I haven't flip flopped, so now you're a liar as well as misguided.
    And I DO NOT have to be American to know that. You're ignorant misguided and arrogant if you think I do.
    Last edited by Wickabee; 01-15-2013 at 10:57 AM.
    Patiently waiting for someone to bring back sax solos and keytars non ironically.

  4. #284



    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,472
    Country
    Card Cash
    0.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Transferred Feedback
    TheBench(150)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by shrewsbury View Post
    I have no issue with you owning any gun, as long as you are mentally stale and not a criminal, go for it, and own all the ammo you want.
    If you own guns and ammo for the shear purpose of one maybe having to fight the federal government, then you live in fear or are mentally unstable.
    owning guns for personal protection, hunting, shooting, collecting, or a combination is great.
    but if you think that if the US Armed Forces were deployed in your neighborhood right now to take your guns, you could fight them off with your guns, you know nothing about survival or self defense.
    Well, I don't live in fear and I'm mentally stable and I still believe that owning guns for the purpose of deterring or fighting a tyrannical government is perfectly legitimate as that was the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

    Don't you see the contradiction in telling people with this belief to disarm? If a tyrannical government deployed the military in their neighborhood, would you suggest they meekly comply or fight with their steak knives?

    The Armenian genocide differs from the six other genocides detailed in Lethal Laws in one important respect. Although many Armenians apparently complied with the gun control laws and the deportation orders, some did not. For example, in southern Syria (then part of the Ottoman Empire), "the Armenians refused to submit to the deportation order . . . . Retreating into the hills, they took up a strategic position and organized an impregnable defense. The Turks attacked and were repulsed with huge losses. They proceeded to lay siege." [10] Eventually 4,000 survivors of the siege were rescued by the British and French. [11] These Armenians who grabbed their guns and headed for the hills are the converse to the vast numbers of Armenian and other genocide victims in Lethal Laws who submitted quietly; although many of the Armenian fighters doubtless died from lack of medical care, starvation, or gunfire, so did many of the Armenians who submitted. As was the case of the Jewish resistance during World War II, armed resistance was enormously risky, but the resisters had a far higher survival rate than the submitters.


    For those that believe we have a benevolent government that will uphold our Constitution, remember we had an American teenager and his father that were assassinated by this same "benevolent" government. And rather than having Congress modify existing laws following the processes outlined in the Constitution, King Obama has apparently planned to create gun control laws by royal decree.
    Buying "Broder" unlicensed sets and singles.

  5. #285
    If a tyrannical government deployed the military in their neighborhood, would you suggest they meekly comply or fight with their steak knives?
    nope, but would suggest you learn about defense, you would be slaughtered in the streets by the armed forces, not much freedom or defense in that.
    Jay Shrewsbury
    Hidden Content

  6. #286



    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,472
    Country
    Card Cash
    0.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Transferred Feedback
    TheBench(150)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by centrehice View Post
    He did not. The reason the Jews were killed wasn't because Hitler had taken their guns away from them
    It certainly made it easier.

    When the Nazis took power in 1933, they apparently found that the 1928 gun control laws served their purposes; not until 1938 did the Nazis bother to replace the 1928 law. The leaving of the Weimar law in place cannot be attributed to lethargy on the Nazis' part; unlike some other totalitarian governments (such as the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia), the Nazis paid great attention to legal draftsmanship and issued a huge volume of laws and regulations. [29] The only immediate change the Nazis made to the gun laws was to bar the import of handguns. [30]

    Shortly after the Nazis took power, they began house-to-house searches to discover firearms in the homes of suspected opponents. They claimed to find large numbers of weapons in the hands of subversives. [31] How many weapons the Nazis actually recovered may never be known. But as historian William Sheridan Allen pointed out in his study of the Nazi rise to power in one town: "Whether or not all the weapon discoveries reported in the local press were authentic is unimportant. The newspapers reported whatever they were told by the police, and what people believed was what was more important than what was true." [32]

    Four days after Hitler's triumphant Anschluss of Austria in March 1938, the Nazis finally enacted their own firearms laws. Additional controls were layered on the 1928 Weimar law: Persons under eighteen were forbidden to buy firearms or ammunition; a special permit was introduced for handguns; Jews were barred from businesses involving firearms; Nazi officials were exempted from the firearms permit system; silencers were outlawed; twenty-two caliber cartridges with hollow points were banned; and firearms which could fold or break down "beyond the common limits of hunting and sporting activities" became illegal. [33]

    On November 9, 1938 and into the next morning, the Nazis unleashed a nationwide race riot. Mobs inspired by the government attacked Jews in their homes, looted Jewish businesses, and burned synagogues, with no interference from the police. [34] The riot became known as "Kristallnacht" ("night of broken glass"). [35] On November 11, Hitler issued a decree forbidding Jews to possess firearms, knives, or truncheons under any circumstances, and to surrender them immediately. [36]

    Nazi mass murders of Jews began after the invasion of the Soviet Union. Extermination camps were not set up until late 1941, so mass murder was at first accomplished by special S.S. units, Einsatzgruppen, on June 22, 1941. Working closely with regular army units, the Einsatzgruppen would move swiftly into newly-conquered areas, to prevent Jews from fleeing. In some cases, Jews were ordered to register with the authorities, an act which made them easy to locate for murder shortly thereafter. As noted above, most of the Soviet population had been disarmed by Lenin and Stalin or had never possessed arms in the first place. [37] Raul Hilberg, a leading scholar of the Nazi military, summarizes that

    The killers were well armed, they knew what to do, and they worked swiftly. The victims were unarmed, bewildered, and followed orders. . . . It is significant that the Jews allowed themselves to be shot without resistance. In all reports of the Einsatzgruppen there were few references to "incidents." The killing units never lost a man during a shooting operation. . . . [T]he Jews remained paralyzed after their first brush with death and in spite of advance knowledge of their fate. [38]
    Buying "Broder" unlicensed sets and singles.

  7. #287
    The Brown Shirted Sturmabteilung had 1 Million members plus in the street using their strong arm tactics against any and all as a form of social control. You expected the Jews or anyone else for that matter to try to defend against that, even armed to the teeth?

    You're American dreaming again.

  8. #288


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    17,378
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    I re read this and just a few things:

    Quote Originally Posted by indexed View Post
    Sure it does because if you said if the gov't secided to do something your guns wouldn't help because it would be over before it started. This is not the truth in any matter.
    Do you have anything to back up your opinion? How does where I live relate to what I know? Please actually answer these instead of switching arguments again.

    Quote Originally Posted by indexed View Post
    You just keep flip flopping and calling me crazy because I dont want to get tossed into a gas chamber. Hitler also used gun control to do this.
    How do I keep flip flopping exactly? My stance has been the same since the beginning. I didn't want to take away your guns then (despite your cries that I did) and I don't want to now. Where is this flip flop?
    Also, I didn't call you crazy. Jay said if the only reason you have to own guns is to take on the US Army, then you need some help. I simply explained what he said, since you obviously didn't get what he said. I didn't even agree, though I will do so now.
    Nowhere in there, though, does it say you're crazy. I do wonder where this gas chamber idea comes from. You think Obama is Hitler?

    Quote Originally Posted by indexed View Post
    And again you have failed to address how law breakers dont have an advantage while you pile up red tape because thats all you are saying to do.
    I am saying legislate some actual responsibility to gun owners. This measure would have absolutely nothing to do with criminals, so your idea that it somehow gives lawbreakers an advantage, even though I've said over and over I'm not taking any guns away, is nonsensical at best. I'm not worried about the criminals in THIS ONE STEP OF MANY, I would like to see the willy-nilly attitude towards guns reigned in a little.

    In a perfect world, it would be unnecessary to legislate responsibility onto gun ownership. Unfortunately, you don't live in a perfect world. You live in America where, as much as you want to focus on the criminals who are coming into your home every night, irresponsible gun owners are a problem that needs fixing.

    Can you respond to that without switching arguments in an attempt to distract and confuse? I think you probably can, but I've never seen it.
    Patiently waiting for someone to bring back sax solos and keytars non ironically.

  9. #289
    Quote Originally Posted by tpeichel View Post
    Well, I don't live in fear and I'm mentally stable and I still believe that owning guns for the purpose of deterring or fighting a tyrannical government is perfectly legitimate as that was the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
    The purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to fight off a tyrannical government? Oofta. Somebody slept through US History in high school.

    When the Bill of Rights was written, the United States did not have a standing army in times of peace. Therefore, for the purpose of national security from possible foreign threats, each state kept a militia. The 2nd Amendment was written to guarantee these militias were adequately prepared in case of attack.

    Militia Act of 1792: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever the United States shall be invaded, or be in imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation or Indian tribe, it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, to call forth such number of the militia of the state or states most convenient to the place of danger or scene of action as he may judge necessary to repel such invasion


    This was the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

    The second clause of the Militia Act directly contradicts your claim that the 2nd Amendment was enacted to protect against a tyrannical government.
    And be it further enacted, That whenever the laws of the United States shall be opposed or the execution thereof obstructed, in any state, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by this act, the same being notified to the President of the United States, by an associate justice or the district judge, it shall be lawful for the President of the United States to call forth the militia of such state to suppress such combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed

    This clause states that the government (tyrannical or not) can use the militia, armed by the 2nd Amendment, to suppress opposition among U.S. citizens. This is directly opposite your claim that the 2nd Amendment was supposed to protect people from the government.

    At the time of the Bill of Rights, being a part of the state militia was mandated for all able-bodied men between the age of 18-45. These men were paid for being part of the militia and trained. These are the people the 2nd Amendment gave guns to, not everyday, average citizens.

    Now, to qualify, I'm a moderate-conservative who has worked 6 consecutive summers at a company that produces gear for deer hunters. I'm in no way against the ownership of guns for that purpose. Heck, I've gone hunting before with a rifle. However, your assertions about the 2nd Amendment need some serious fact-checking.

  10. #290
    ds:

    Informative, correct and well written. Thanks for adding some fact to the flying jingoism around this crazy place.

Page 29 of 31 FirstFirst ... 19262728293031 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •