Tyranny in America? Somewhat funny vid

[burlyman30]

If I keep worrying to this level, I should just build a moat and fortress around my house. It just isn't practical.

Keeping that moat full.... your water bill would be atrocious!

[DJM]

The debate should be whether we can change human nature or not. The horses are already out of the barn, we must think of other ways to help lower violent crimes.

zanex

[BBG]

The debate should be whether we can change human nature or not. The horses are already out of the barn, we must think of other ways to help lower violent crimes.

We could shoot the horses with bullets.

[burlyman30]

Burly, even though we often disagree, you are actually one of my favorite people to debate politics with. You are just moderate right enough, and I am just moderate left enough (remember, I am not for a full ban on guns, something the left would want), that I think we agree on many of the larger pictures, and bicker on the details.

I echo your sentiments. Always appreciate a well thought out point of view that is logically supported.

I don't entirely disagree with your last post. My earlier statement could have been taken to mean "all government decisions are corrupt ". This wasn't clear, so my apologies there. I meant to allude that we cannot count on our government to always act in our best interest. Certainly there have been times when it has.

I understand your point about all the little details that we cannot possibly vote for daily and our representatives do much of this for us. I just happen to think that there are a lot of laws on the books that hinder personal freedoms that neither need to be there, nor need to be voted on. The phrase "live, and let live" comes to mind. Having either the advantage or disadvantage (you decide) of being a bit older than some of you, I've seen quite a few changes in this country in the last 40 years. Some of them are pretty amazing and exciting, while others are troubling.

I'm not without the ability to look at issues and evidence and occasionally change my mind, either. I have (even at my advanced age) come to a different place in my opinion on recreational drug use that is certainly more in line with the other views I hold on personal freedoms even though I choose not to partake in said recreation.

[Rulk]

Today's life is all about multitasking^. ( replying to H2 last post ).

- - - Updated - - -

We could shoot the horses with bullets.

Can we eat the horses after?

[burlyman30]

zanex

And castration.

[burlyman30]

Saw this article and thought that this thread was a perfect place for it. Some interesting points and perspective in this...


"The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)


Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force.

Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion.
Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force.
You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations.
These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a armed mugger to do his job.
That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury.
This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst.
The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter.
It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force.

It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)

[Macdon1588]

Your Life? What do you envision that entails the National Guard carrying out random executions?

In the 1960's the National Guard killed students at Kent State and you ought to look up footage of a Guardsman firing a vehicle mounted "Ma Deuce" into an apartment complex.

[DJM]

the article is interesting and well versed argument, unlike a few pages back

not american, but a human, my only rebuttal is this, he states carrying a gun around with him equals the playing field if a situation arises, and thats civilized, i ask this to you as americans, is your country so dangerous that possibility of danger is so present around the corner one must have his gun much like his car keys as he heads out the door?

impo, i just think dealing with 'the mugger' more severely, regardless of the state of his victim, would result in less of this action

as a child when you did wrong, mommy telling you no or daddy taking the belt to your ass (as a psych im against but for the purpose of this), which was more effective in stopping the undesirable action? daddy obviously as his consequence was more severe, and you as a child weighed that against the desire to commit whatever it is he opposed, and more than likely knowing the belt was a possibility you thought long and hard, the permissive parent has a child that will be a repeat offender because they are unfazed by the consequence. i see this all the fkn time.....children with no defined limits and subsequent consequences more often than not have behavioral issues of different degrees......because mommy and daddy didnt say no firmly enough, be it through a myriad of techniques.

murder, rape, robbery, ect will always exist, it has since beginning of time, but if it was managed better, more severe consequences as opposed to a horrific judicial system of deals and rules and different levels of murder where one can get off serving 2yrs cause it was involuntary or altered state of mind........a rapist is sentenced on was level of injury his victim obtained, rape and murder or rape and flee is still fkn rape imo, only instead of looking at one as more severe, it was actually two crimes, the second being more severe

you cant solve a gun violence with guns, that is the problem on a whole
much like you dont hit your child for hitting

[h2s]

Well said.