gun question - I would like to understand this

[peervardy]

ok, this is a gunuine question, I would like to try to understand this, and I promise not to argue or point out if I disagree with your position.some body on one of the gun threads wrote about wanting to "excersize" his second ammendment rights - sort of carrying a gun to protect the right to carry a gun, I guess. does that extend to other rights? should we all excersize our right to free speech by standing in public and saying a lot of stupid hateful things? is that equally patriotic? what about abortion? there seems to be a right to have abortion, I don't think that abortion is a good thing, but I am glad that there is a right to access of legal abortions. should I get an abortion every few years, to excersize the constitutional right?on AAAC, there seems to be a feeling that the very act of having a huge number of citizens carrying guns in the US makes the US safe from everything. honestly, this seems to me to be magical thinking - I can't see any rational thought behind this at all. sort of like believing that if we pray that the rains will come, as far as I can see. can anybody explain this to me (and, not by explaining how 100,000 middle aged untrained men with pearl handled 45's are going to stop a column of tanks, that is not rational reasoning, I mean the concept that the very existance of firearms makes the world a better place)thank you

[Drake Dun]

Thank you for playing. Please try again.

[HumanePain]

Wow that guy was all over the road. Focus dude, focus.

And by the way, the American public is already the largest most heavily armed private population in the world.

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

Wow that guy was all over the road. Focus dude, focus.

And by the way, the American public is already the largest most heavily armed private population in the world.

And Bush is still alive.

[NightmareInShiningArmour]

Originally Posted by Albert Mond

And Bush is still alive.

Strange isn't it?

[CptSternn]

Americas #1 export is 'defence'. Thats a nice way of saying guns and bombs. If they didn't encourage their own citizens to buy their products, then people around the world might not want them either.

[Drake Dun]

I didn't think this thread could actually get sillier. :P

[PortraitOfSanity]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Americas #1 export is 'defence'. Thats a nice way of saying guns and bombs. If they didn't encourage their own citizens to buy their products, then people around the world might not want them either.

Fact #1: People like to kill people.
Fact #2: People need guns to kill people.

Conclusion: Sell guns to people.

[HellforgedX]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

Fact #1: People like to kill people.
Fact #2: People need guns to kill people.

Conclusion: Sell guns to people.

As I've been told before, these aren't facts, they're opinions.

But that's beside the point.
Guns are not the question; they're the ANSWER, man! The Nuge rules!

[Jonathan]

OK, wow.

First of, Peervardy, there is a huge difference between exercising an individuals rights in a responsible manner, and exercising them irresponsibly. From the sound of your essay there, you wouldn't like it if someone stood on the corner shouting out hateful noise. Fine, great, but how do you stop him from doing it without causing a huge problem for yourself when you say something some other guy doesn't like? Part of having freedoms is to deal with people exercising them in ways you do not necessarily approve of.

Regarding your belief that private ownership of firearms has no bearing on the country's safety, I would like to introduce you to a quote by Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, made during World War II: "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." Clearly, someone saw it as a potential problem and took it seriously.

The statement that Americans are somehow encouraged to buy firearms is beyond absurd. Granted I haven't visited all fifty, but I have yet to hear of a state that urged citizens to buy guns. Two rather extreme counter-examples come to mind as Massachusetts and California, where purchasing a gun can be quite difficult.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Dude, that makes no fucking sense. Your hyperbolic 'use of rights' is stupid. Get an abortion every few years because you have a right to abortion? That has no parallel to the second amendment right unless you said that they shoot someone every now and then.

They want to exert their second amendment right by carrying a gun and continuing their normal and peaceful lives.
Parallel to that then they would exert their first amendment by expressing valuable opinions.
Exert their right to have abortions by taking sexual responsibility.

Nice job at trying to sound politically smart.

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Dude, that makes no fucking sense. Your hyperbolic 'use of rights' is stupid. Get an abortion every few years because you have a right to abortion? That has no parallel to the second amendment right unless you said that they shoot someone every now and then.

I probably misread that, but it seems like you're comparing undeveloped fetuses/eggs to conscious exterior people.

[Godslayer Jillian]

I simply assumed that's the context he is talking about if he was trying to make the second amendment look ridiculous by trying to exaggerate and say that it's also ridiculous to get an abortion as often as possible.

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I simply assumed that's the context he is talking about if he was trying to make the second amendment look ridiculous by trying to exaggerate and say that it's also ridiculous to get an abortion as often as possible.

Oh. In that case I apologize for my misconception (lol, misconception nyuk nyuk nyuk!).

[Drake Dun]

Long story short: Fuck the grand narratives about revolutions and repulsions of foreign evasions. A person's mere ownership of a gun harms nobody. No harm, no foul. QED.

Give me a justification for banning weapons, and I'll turn it around and tell you why you the police should knock down your door and take away your marijuana. Most of the effort I expend on politics goes to railing against right wing asshats, but liberals make me sick where it comes to gun bans.

Oh yeah, and lay off the smokers.

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Long story short: Fuck the grand narratives about revolutions and repulsions of foreign evasions. A person's mere ownership of a gun harms nobody. No harm, no foul. QED.

Give me a justification for banning weapons, and I'll turn it around and tell you why you the police should knock down your door and take away your marijuana. Most of the effort I expend on politics goes to railing against right wing asshats, but liberals make me sick where it comes to gun bans.

Oh yeah, and lay off the smokers.

Neither a gun ban nor a weed ban would affect me. =/

[Drake Dun]

Me either, actually. It's just the principle of the thing.

[viscus]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

Me either, actually. It's just the principle of the thing.

How do you feel about the fact that it's virtually impossible to get a handgun over here?

[Drake Dun]

It bothers me less, since even after five years I still feel basically like an outsider whose opinions on the way they run their society are irrelevant.

In theory the principle remains applicable anywhere, and so I suppose that I should be saying yes, people should be free from the force of law where it comes to weapon ownership.

[ThreeEyesOni]

The issue boils back to the fact that (from many points of view) the main reason to legally bar responsible adults from owning firearms is because it makes it much easier to make them do what you (as the government) want. That's the whole point of the 3nd Amendment; it's basically there to make sure that the population does not get into this sort of predicament (even more important when you talk about a country that formed through armed revolt and international war).