I would also like to know DB Cooper's source of information regarding the likely outcome of a conflict between the US military and a large portion of the civilian population. He's no doubt alluding to some credible military study/paper/war game.
Nope. Just talking out of my ass, to be honest. I'm just thinking the level of training and sophistication of our armed forces v. a loosely-organized force of untrained civilians equals military coup. Thus, if we think the rise of a tyrannical government is a valid prospect, it should be prepared for in the spirit of the second amendment with a rigorous and extensive citizen militia system.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
DB_Cooper said:
if we think the rise of a tyrannical government is a valid prospect
Conquered Euro peoples don't really have a say on this one.
A 6 year old British boy died in that school. This free "Euro person" doesn't really give a fuck about obtaining your permission.
You have no [del]gun[/del] vote, you have no say. See: Syria
Now you're all over the shop. Syrians have millions of guns but they don't have any say. You're confusing freedom fighting with freedom preserving; pacific civil society with a state of permanent siege. You never learnt to put the fucking things down since the end of the war of independence.
You're good at short pithy answers so here's a simple question. I think your honest answer is "yes" but I want to see if you have the balls to say it without the 2nd amendement doing it for you.
Do recurrent massacres of cinema goers and 6 year old school children represent a price worth paying for continuing with the status quo?
I reject the premise of your question but if by "the status quo" you mean "freedom," then of course yes. Freedom fighting is freedom preserving and it's a never-ending battle. The existence of so many guns in the US alone is a subtle restraint on power.
Shit, you could have a house full of AR-15s and they ain't gonna do a fucking thing against a drone strike, or a tank, or a sharpshooter...all the fat, goateed honkies in Oakleys in the world ain't gonna be able to do shit.
Shit, you could have a house full of AR-15s and they ain't gonna do a fucking thing against a drone strike, or a tank, or a sharpshooter...all the fat, goateed honkies in Oakleys in the world ain't gonna be able to do shit.
That's kind of what the Bush administration believed about Iraq.
Again, Manchurian Candidate. Normal people, even with severe mental disorders, don't have the gumption to shoot up rooms full of people...that is, without some sort of mind control at work. All these school shooters wind up having some ties to military programs that meddle with mind control, period.
Source?
OK, I'll take a wild guess - you just made this up.
Nope. Info is out there. In fact, it's a clear pattern we should all be well familiar with by now.
Manchurian Candidates have been around for 50+ years, but we're still not supposed to believe they exist.
All these dudes have been programmed and triggered to act. Without it, they wouldn't be capable of pulling off such heinous crimes.
Where exactly "out there"? I couldn't find anything suggesting this has ever happened.
And why does the government want to shoot up schools full of kids?
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Awesome that this tragedy has brought our resident ambulance-chasing, Obama-phile douchebags back to the board.
Taking the well-armed militia slippery slope all the way down the waterslide, I will say that to remain "well armed" against our military, we better start toolin' the fuck up! Assault rifles are positively quaint compared to the arsenal that would rain down on all of us resisters of tyranny.
Conquered Euro peoples don't really have a say on this one.
A 6 year old British boy died in that school. This free "Euro person" doesn't really give a fuck about obtaining your permission.
You have no [del]gun[/del] vote, you have no say. See: Syria
Now you're all over the shop. Syrians have millions of guns but they don't have any say. You're confusing freedom fighting with freedom preserving; pacific civil society with a state of permanent siege. You never learnt to put the fucking things down since the end of the war of independence.
You're good at short pithy answers so here's a simple question. I think your honest answer is "yes" but I want to see if you have the balls to say it without the 2nd amendement doing it for you.
Do recurrent massacres of cinema goers and 6 year old school children represent a price worth paying for continuing with the status quo?
Freedom fighting
is freedom preserving and it's a never-ending battle. The existence of so many guns in the US alone is a subtle restraint on power.
They've got you thinking exactly what they wanted. Granted it's a never ending battle to preserve freedoms but the battle ground switched from the street to the industrial-financial-multinational complex eons back. They don't want to take your house, your car, or your gun - they want to sell it to you! The battle is in global capital markets, virtual stock, corporate lobbying and vested interests. You can't shoot a derivative. The only "power" that wants to break into your house is the poor bum that doesn't have one. It's like that japanese military officer discovered in the Burmese jungle in 1975 convinced that the second world war was still raging. Get out of your bunker, put your goddam guns down and get your eyes back on the ball. It's 2012, not 1791.
great job sparking a gun control debate when the kids arent even in the ground yet. quality work guys, you've really outdone yourselves
please explain how me calling for people to not turn this tragedy into a political mess (or at least have the decency to wait a few) is stupid. the fact that people are getting so heated in this thread when i've just asked people to chill kinda exemplifies my point.
It's got nothing to do with politics. Gun Control is not a strong cause to run with in the batshit crazy country of USA.
It has to do with change, and it's there isn't exactly time to wait.
Politics can wait; there is a need to start making rational and smart decisions. The unlikelihood of change is a pretty big tragedy too.
It's got nothing to do with politics. Gun Control is not a strong cause to run with in the batshit crazy country of USA.
It has to do with change, and it's there isn't exactly time to wait.
Politics can wait; there is a need to start making rational and smart decisions. The unlikelihood of change is a pretty big tragedy too.
It has almost everything to do with politics - that is how change happens
I am not certain how anyone expects change to come without employing politics and all the difficult conversations that come with the territory.
Do recurrent massacres of cinema goers and 6 year old school children represent a price worth paying for continuing with the status quo?
And while I understand the point, there are a few hundred victims of gun violence in a little place called Chicago that deserve a minute of consideration in this discussion.
It has almost everything to do with politics - that is how change happens
I am not certain how anyone expects change to come without employing politics and all the difficult conversations that come with the territory.
i agree.
dude said "how (is) calling for people to not turn this tragedy into a political mess (or at least have the decency to wait a few) stupid"
Calling for gun control, i meant, isn't asking for a "political mess", it's asking for reason and logic.
Comments
Nope. Just talking out of my ass, to be honest. I'm just thinking the level of training and sophistication of our armed forces v. a loosely-organized force of untrained civilians equals military coup. Thus, if we think the rise of a tyrannical government is a valid prospect, it should be prepared for in the spirit of the second amendment with a rigorous and extensive citizen militia system.
If we "think"?
Valid "prospect"?
This is why we can no longer have nice things.
Welcome to the past hundred years.
Where exactly "out there"? I couldn't find anything suggesting this has ever happened.
And why does the government want to shoot up schools full of kids?
Good bye, thread.
Don't come back.
Damn, R*****. Didn't mean to get you so riled.
You know it wasn't you, buddy roe.
They've got you thinking exactly what they wanted. Granted it's a never ending battle to preserve freedoms but the battle ground switched from the street to the industrial-financial-multinational complex eons back. They don't want to take your house, your car, or your gun - they want to sell it to you! The battle is in global capital markets, virtual stock, corporate lobbying and vested interests. You can't shoot a derivative. The only "power" that wants to break into your house is the poor bum that doesn't have one. It's like that japanese military officer discovered in the Burmese jungle in 1975 convinced that the second world war was still raging. Get out of your bunker, put your goddam guns down and get your eyes back on the ball. It's 2012, not 1791.
Thanks.
Wish the tresvants would leave this thread, bro.
b/w
Still haven't looked up the facts yet, have you bro?
bonus beat: Is it still too soon, Ralph?
don't respond!
It has to do with change, and it's there isn't exactly time to wait.
Politics can wait; there is a need to start making rational and smart decisions. The unlikelihood of change is a pretty big tragedy too.
It has almost everything to do with politics - that is how change happens
I am not certain how anyone expects change to come without employing politics and all the difficult conversations that come with the territory.
And while I understand the point, there are a few hundred victims of gun violence in a little place called Chicago that deserve a minute of consideration in this discussion.
Instead of taking your toys and splitting, hows about providing some evidence for your totally outrageous explanation of a heartbreaking tragedy?
Sorry, but saying it's 'out there' and expecting people to swallow that doesn't really cut it.