Hypocrisy at its best, GUNS and Liberals

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

I would love to see that made clear. Not necessarily with another amendment, but by modifying the original 2nd Amendment.

I don't believe Amendments can be modified. Additional amendments can be made to clarify (or even reverse) them, as in the case of Prohibition.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

• Quote

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

But it's not well trained soldiers we're talking about. It's people like PJ who think they can take on the US Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, and win.

Well, maybe the Air Force is doable for one guy with a hunting rifle -

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[EricTheRed 0]

Quote

The folks at Ruby Ridge and Waco didn't fare so well.

While true, the outcome would have been more unlikely if the general population was in revolt at the same time.
(It's a bit tougher to lay a seige if you have to protect your flanks from snipers and IED's. There are plenty of folks on this forum alone that are likely very capable of creating some damn impressive IED's I'm sure. I'd bet a few could even whip up a small payload cruise missle based on micro turbines and RC aircraft tech.)

Best of all though, we can have a revolution without guns whenever we want just by voting the bastards out!

illegible usually

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

But it's not well trained soldiers we're talking about. It's people like PJ who think they can take on the US Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, and win.

Well, maybe the Air Force is doable for one guy with a hunting rifle -

During the Battle of Britain a Dornier 17 was indeed shot down by a lucky shot from an infantryman during a raid on Biggin Hill (Aug 18, 1940 I believe). Modern USAF combat aircraft have rather better armor than Do17s, though.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

*** There are plenty of folks on this forum alone that are likely very capable of creating some damn impressive IED's I'm sure. I'd bet a few could even whip up a small payload cruise missle based on micro turbines and RC aircraft tech.)

Like
this and this?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Like
this and this?

You're right, these are a threat to national security. Better monitor these people constantly.

Model rockets don't kill people, people with model rockets kill people.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[aftermid 0]

Quote

What’s more I think GW is a neo-fascist tyrant.

Quote

gratuitous name calling and generalization

Although the statement in itself is name-calling, it is based on a relatively factual analogy. In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush has attacked our civil liberties in a manner similar to that of the Nazi’s following the Reichstag fire of 1933. Although the events of the Nazi party’s rise to power were much quicker the tactics are very much the same: have the people sacrifice freedom under the guise of security. As Sneakerz so eloquently pointed out:

"Don't forget that the terrorists that attacked up on 9/11 were able to take advantage of many of these so called privacy protection laws to be able to hide in this country undetected until they attacked."

According to this logic, we clearly need to exchange freedom for security. Unfortunately freedom and security are rarely in accord. Historically or maybe ideologically, we’ve valued freedom over security i.e. better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man is convicted.

[rehmwa 2]

I wasn't discussing the content of the bit, just that it was gratuitously inserted and didn't add value to the discussion. Thus, "gratuitous, name calling".

As for your specific position, we have a lot of threads that goes back and forth on that, while I'd like to see this one turn to a frank and open discussion about just how scary sock puppets are.

But to respond to the same old tired topic, I'm not thrilled with GWB either, but considered him better at vote time than either John or Al. Still do really. It's a crappy way to have to vote for a president, lesser of two evils.....

I'd like to see better candidates get through the primaries. I'd like to see more mature and less petty types get into congress, IS THIS REALLY THE BEST EITHER PARTY CAN DO?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

But to respond to the same old tired topic, I'm not thrilled with GWB either, but considered him better at vote time than either John or Al. Still do really. It's a crappy way to have to vote for a president, lesser of two evils.....

I really hate that I am forced to think the same thing.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I really hate that I am forced to think the same thing.

Yeah, sock puppets are frightening.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[aftermid 0]

Quote

It's a crappy way to have to vote for a president, lesser of two evils.....

I'd like to see better candidates get through the primaries. I'd like to see more mature and less petty types get into congress, IS THIS REALLY THE BEST EITHER PARTY CAN DO?

You summed up a certain amount of my original rant. The nature of the current two party dominence rarely produces quality leadership, more somewhat blind propulsion of a given idology.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

Like
this and this?

You're right, these are a threat to national security. Better monitor these people constantly.

Model rockets don't kill people, people with model rockets kill people.

Damn straight! That's why BATFE requires an explosives users permit (with fingerprints and warrantless search of your home) for model rocket motors with more than 2 oz of propellant (even though the propellant is not an explosive).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The nature of the current two party dominence rarely produces quality leadership, more somewhat blind propulsion of a given idology.

"blind propulsion of a given ideology"

That's nice, can use that?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[steve1 5]

Quote

But it's not well trained soldiers we're talking about. It's people like PJ who think they can take on the US Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, and win.

Yes, that's a fact. The average hunter may have trouble hitting their target at 200 yards let alone 600 or further out. But....they are very trainable!...Take almost anyone who hunts and shoots a lot, and then give them some training and most take to it like ducks to water. They can become very skilled at long range shooting. Most could also be trained in how to use explosives, pull ambushes, or take part in other operations. This is how unconventional wars are often fought. Training is often conducted in secret.

How many people in the civilian sector are former military or even have Swat training. These folks could be used as instructors. Or how many other governments might be sympathetic to your cause. They often provide advisors, weapons, ammo, etc. Even some of the high tech stuff you mentioned earlier might be supplied by others outside your country.

Sure, the guy at Ruby Ridge didn't fair so well. The Government secretly surrounded his home with a large force, and then shot the hell out of his family.

And what did the guy do?...Sell a weapon with too short of a barrel...That's about it. After the government had shot my wife I wouldn't have given up either. And then how many millions did the Government waste in investigating him prior to this? This is exactly what the 2nd amendment was designed to prevent. Some times I wonder whose side you're on Kallend....

Not all armed rebellions are successful, but that doesn't mean they can't be. (Even today.) The chance of success often hinges on the weapons citizens are allowed to keep. Most Governments know this. There isn't much of a chance of a rebellion succeeding somewhere where the government has already confiscated all the weapons. There's many countries that have to put up with a dirt bag government simply because they have no means to fight back, or change things politically.

Maybe you don't agree with this, but this is exactly how I see things.....Steve1

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

And what did the guy do?...Sell a weapon with too short of a barrel...That's about it. After the government had shot my wife I wouldn't have given up either. And then how many millions did the Government waste in investigating him prior to this? This is exactly what the 2nd amendment was designed to prevent. Some times I wonder whose side you're on Kallend....

So how did the 2nd Amendment help here? You've lost me.

Whose side am I on? I am on the side of restricting the government's powers to those granted in the constitution, and letting the people have all the others as the 9th and 10th Amendments might suggest.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Some times I wonder whose side you're on Kallend....

My impression is Kallend:

1 - Supports the right to keep and bear arms. J
2 - Thinks it is rather futile against great big tanks and guns, but the right should remain anyway
3 - Find people that go on about it excessively on both sides are rather irritating and amusing at the same time.

but that's just my take on it.

I agree, other than I think #2 is bit cynical and I have faith in individuals to find ways when necessity drives them.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Amazon 7]

Quote

But it's not well trained soldiers we're talking about. It's people like PJ who think they can take on the US Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, and win.
...

But But But... the Wolverines.... took on the whole Russian-Nicaraguan-Mexican invasion force and kicked theri butts.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

But But But... the Wolverines.... took on the whole Russian-Nicaraguan-Mexican invasion force and kicked theri butts.

Yeah, that guy is cool. You know his mutation is virtually instant healing power. The super sharp claws and strong skeleton were surgically added.

But what can the rest of us do. My superpowers can't be used in an offensive way other than olfactorily offensive.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Amazon 7]

DUDE.. Wrong Movie....militia type dudes just love the movie RED DAWN..... the Wolverines were the " insurgents"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

What a load of rubbish. If your government comes after you with the resources at its disposal, you won't stand a chance regardless of how many Glocks you own. It isn't 1776 any more, they have really serious stuff that you simply can't get.

Of all the arguments in favor of gun ownership, that is the most absurd by far.

You just have not considered, or probably even read treatments of, the reasons why the government would have a hard-as-hell time actually waging a guerrilla war against its 80,000,000+ armed citizens.


-

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

I would love to see that made clear. Not necessarily with another amendment, but by modifying the original 2nd Amendment.

Wouldn't that be judicial activism???

No. Judges can't change the Constitution.

Reading Assignment

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Ah, but how many of those 80M are actually trained in the use of weapons, have any clue about tactics, and have appropriate guns?

There are more former members of the armed forces in the civilian population, then there are active duty military members. The Army would be outnumbered by trained, skilled militia members, educated in the art of war.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

But it's not well trained soldiers we're talking about. It's people like PJ who think they can take on the US Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, and win.

Liberals crack me up.

On the one hand, they think that America's armed forces, the most lethal in the history of the world, can't possibly win against a third-world insurgency in Iraq.

And at the same time, they think that a civilian uprising in America by trained former soldiers, can't possibly win against American active-duty forces.

Go figure...

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

Ah, but how many of those 80M are actually trained in the use of weapons, have any clue about tactics, and have appropriate guns?

There are more former members of the armed forces in the civilian population, then there are active duty military members. The Army would be outnumbered by trained, skilled militia members, educated in the art of war.

Who has the big guns, bombs, gunships, tanks, radars, spy satellites....?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

But it's not well trained soldiers we're talking about. It's people like PJ who think they can take on the US Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, and win.

Liberals crack me up.

On the one hand, they think that America's armed forces, the most lethal in the history of the world, can't possibly win against a third-world insurgency in Iraq.

And at the same time, they think that a civilian uprising in America by trained former soldiers, can't possibly win against American active-duty forces.

Go figure...

Apples and oranges, dear boy. We are not a tyrannical force in Iraq, just uninvited guests whose leader said "Bring 'em on" to the insurgents. Civil wars always get very much nastier.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.