Jesus christ...

Yes he is and so are you. I'm talking about the civil war you dumb cunt, not the revolutionary war The spirit of revolution is ingrained in the American consciousness. It is written into our constitution. The revolutionary war, the whiskey rebellion, Shay's rebellion, the civil war...fucking prohibition. Americans will spill blood for liberty, it is our culture, it is our essence as a people. You fuck with it, you have to spill blood . It doesn't matter what part of the bill of rights youi try to do away with it.

Think about this: MOST OF THE MILITARY IS MADE UP OF GUN NUTS. That's why they joined. They are made up by the very "red-necks" you despise. An oppressive government wouldn't be able to simply roll over armed american citizens (and we have proven that time and again), and even if it could, that was never Kontan's point.

This is a Straw-man argument. Not only is it wrong, it's also completely irrelevant. KOntan's argument was that blood of innocent Americans needs to be spilled for anti-gunners to have their way. Is Onyx willing to Kill Deadman so that he can have his nanny-state wankfest? Because if the way he's talking is any indication he will have to do it. Onyx, do you have the consitution for that? Do you have the fucking balls?

Jillian, you don't even agree with this dumbass, you're only taking issue with Kontan because you don't want to be on the same side as some redneck. What's funny is it's that redneck's sacrifice that gives you the freedom to run your little anarchy club.

And mine won't be the only body cooling off after the fight that I can assure you if it be 1 or 100 the score will be the same I took one of the bastards with me and fufilled my oath to never stop until dead.

My mistake, I just saw. But then who the fuck are you calling Rebels?
The south had as much legitimacy as the north; it just so happened that the north won.
Check it out, your argument was less stupid when I mistook it.

I don't have a problem with that per se, but please tell me you're not actually so pompous that you're saying it's solely an American trait.
It's called BEING HUMAN you dumb cunt. Tell me we won't have a problem with this too.

Now now, when did I say I despise rednecks?
Stop trying to make up bullshit.

Wait, what the fuck? What blood needs to be spilled to protect the second amendment?

Again, making up bullshit to insult someone? You're not even talking about me and I can see that. Nowhere did Onyx hint that he had to kill Deadman to have a nanny state.
And you dare to say I'm using a straw man argument. That's bullshit.

Oh, and yet more bullshit. Why the fuck are you even calling Deadman a redneck?
And how the fuck does his sacrifice allow me to have my 'little anarchy club'?
You realize that's, word for word, the same fucking rhetoric pro-war people say? You know, soldiers killing Iraqis to defend our freedom and all.

Depending on who you're labeling the Iraqi Civilians and The U.S. Government Soldiers Jillian.

My take on the War in Iraq is,it was a blue print or trial run for a conflict with the American citizens,notice some of the new tech that's coming out to help protect our soldiers against ambushes now while I think it's good that soldiers are protected,I also see the flip side,of how that technology can be used against us.

As well as the new Less Lethal weapons designed for Crowd Control.

Your analogy is exactly what I'm arguing against. And, just for the record, I'm not anti-gun. I have a few in the garage, somewhere. When my brother breaks his shotgun out when I'm at his place I'm right there in line with his sons to take my turn blasting holes in shit.

What I'm trying to argue against is the stupidity that gun ownership is some sort of deterrent against the government when, in fact, if they wanted to the government would roll right over any militia group. Probably with the full support of the the majority of the US population.

Just look at how protesters are treated. The riot squad comes out, tosses some tear gas and bashes some heads. A few people complain about the treatment, mostly on the internet because they can't get any MSM attention, even more argue that the cops were "just doing their jobs", often with MSM attention and within the MSM, while the rest sit on their couches and ignore it.

That's not fair to the federal government. The people, of whom the federal government is made up of, have a good record for fucking each other over. The federal government just lends authority behind the actions. The government is only as good as the society that it draws its' members from.

The reason you don't see or hear about that from MSM is because the people that own the Broadcasting Companies also have ties to police organizations.

The Mainstream news is as corrupt as this Government the mainstream Media is the Governments mouth piece.

As goes the MSM, so goes public opinion.

Unless the people that have seen what is going on start talking to other members of the citizenship and stand up when the time comes.

Ummm, do you interact with normal people much? . First of all, if someone on the 6 o' clock news says we're only listening in on terrorist conversations then it's true. Second, people believe their own eyes over your words. On the news it peaceful protesters being left alone and only violent involved with violence were being tear gased and manhandled, never mind that the only violence they were involved in was the police manhandling them. Sure, we all know that brief clips on the news don't really show the whole story. To bad that's what gets burned into their memories. Another thing is that people are prideful, they hate to be wrong. If the initial report they got from the news led them to believe that the government was justified in its' actions then their minds will fight any attempt to alter that perception, even their own.

There's lots of examples of this. Things like only junkies and homosexuals get AIDS, that Cuba was ever a threat and/or is still a threat, socialised medicine doesn't work, the markets always offer the best solutions.

More and more are finding out and are informing others.

The information is sought out not fought over or force fed.

Onyx: Answer the fucking question. Are you prepared to spill blood for your ideals? Are you ready to kill Deadman so you can have the world that you want? He obviously stands in your way and obviously will not be persuaded, so what are you going to do?

You know what, I know where this is going, so I'll answer for you: No. You're not ready to do that, because you're a fucking coward. Like Jillian you're willing to talk and talk and talk but you'll never put any action to it because you're not willing to sacrifice for your ideals.

Are you, Despanan? Everything about you screams out "pussy that wants to feel big after no one liked his play".

Wow, you're sounding crazy there. Way off to boot. The people currently running the Iraq war, well most of them have been all along just the top has changed much, haven't been around to be using it as a blueprint for anything.

As for the people who started it, the neo-cons, their motivation and what they were using it for is well known. They were all hold overs from the cold war who never learned it was over and they thought they were going to transform the middle east into a thriving democracy with the US as their benevolent rescuers from tyrannical dictatorships, thus improving our standing in the world and proving our might. 9/11 proved it had to be done because everyone knows democracies don't produce terrorists *cough*McVeigh*Cough*. For some reason they had it through their heads that Iraq was the best place to start and that, after Iraq fell, the rest of the ME would topple as people rose up democracy would flower. To bad they didn't remember that, and no one reminded them that, during the cold war they were the same people who had a bad habit of overthrowing fledgling democracies while arming and propping up the same dictators we were supposed to be now saving the from, Saddam in particular.

There was no plans of using the fighting as a blueprint because there wasn't supposed to be an insurgency. The people were supposed to welcome us with candy, flowers and open arms.

After that all I have to ask is.

Who is calling who crazy?

And who the hell gains the most from the attacks on 9/11 ?

The Federal Government that's who and it isn't about money or political clout,it is only for Control.

Look at how much bigger the fed is now from a few years ago.

You know, maybe if you were a little more respectful people would more willing to answer the questions you pose. Being snarky or having a little venom is one thing, being an outright ass is another. Learn the difference.

Secondly, people may also take you more seriously if your limited intellect allowed you to understand what the conversation was about. Let me explain something to you, child. And you are acting like a child. I never once said guns should be banned or taken away from people. In fact, I distinctly remember stating that the types, number and frequency of gun purchases should be stricter. What I said the second amendment had outlived its' purpose and the argument that ensued, is that to big of a word for you, was in regards to whether or not a civilian uprising could succeed or not. There was also some argument on how effective guns were for self defence situations among the general populace. How you confused any of this with advocating banning guns and subsequently using force to take them away from people is beyond me. Other than pure stupidity that is.

Hey Onyx, you still haven't answered the question!
Answer if you would kill for your ideals. You wouldn't want to be thought of as a pussy by some failed actor in Kentucky that only deigns to answer you ON HIS FREE TIME, would you?

How can I answer when I've never been put in the position where I have to.

Neither has he, but he's manly enough to belittle other people with that hypothetical.

Jillian I have to ask you a question and this is not meant as an attack...just wondering.

What would/will you do when Federal Agents come to forcefully remove you from your home and force you and your family members into a special camp at a remote location?

Will you stand and fight or Go peacefully?

Here's the way I see the country currently:
Epic fail two party system.
Each party as bad as the last (and essentially the same).
Other parties have no hope at winning.
Media Controls who gets elected because they get to decide who gets air time or who gets talked about as a candidate.
People vote, but only the people in the first few states to vote actually matter.
Stupid electoral college system where the losing candidate can win the popular vote.
When that fails Supreme Court flips a coin. (lol 2000 election)
Media runs everyone's life.
The majority of the American's don't know or don't care. (a really fucked up mix of 1984 and Brave New World)


The fact is we are in desperate need of a revolution but it won't likely ever happen there are too few people who care. If the government tries to all out ban guns shit will go down, because many gun owners have the "out of my cold dead hands" mentality.



Now what I think is going on in this thread is:

delk has a good description of why the Second Amendment is in the Constitution

deadman seems to believe a lot of the same things I do. (with the exception of he believes in the constitution as written and I think it needs a much deserved re-write top to bottom in a new common language everyone can understand and the old copy burned (it doesn't matter if its almost the same exact thing it needs to be re-written already))

onxy has a lot of great points but I think he severely underestimates what would happen if there were an armed revolution. If enough like minded people got together they could still make their ideals felt even if it were only for a little bit. He may be right but I'd like to hope that the people would be able to overthrow the government like the writers of the constitution would have wanted. Our whole system is checks and balances. In the beginning the people were the ultimate check and balance for their government and they protected and nurtured our young democracy. It grew and gained power. In the 1860's a few states (well 11 of them) tried to get away from a system they had issues with and the were dragged back into it by force. It's continued to grow and is probably unstoppable now. Which is kind of sad because that original idea of democracy is looking pretty sickly...

godslayer seems to just enjoy causing trouble because she enjoys the chaos that the arguments create

despanan seems to be largely inflammatory but he called out godslayer which i found amusing....



"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure." -Thomas Jefferson

I would also like to add that although its all well and good to say that you would never take a life. If it comes down to killing or being killed no animal is going to lie down and take it (even a plant will fight back to the best of its ability). Fighting for an ideal which you consider central to your way of life is no different.

I don't feel the constitution should be burned or changed in anyway,shape form or fashion.

That document is the backbone of the American people,to destroy it is to destroy the history of all our fallen family members that fought for this country, to do such a thing is nothing more than a betrayal to the American people and to this republic for the 200 or so years it has stood.

To be honest, I don't know if I could take another person's life on purpose just for my ideals. If someone were threatening my loved ones, then perhaps I would, but I don't know if I could do it just for my opinions and personal, intangible beliefs.