Are Americans any different?
Chukpike
Banned
"Okay, I'll be blunt"
Be what ever you want to be its a free country, as long as you keep your gun handy and your powder dry.;-)
"The argument isn't about the Constitution being a living document."
I never said it was.
"It's about what would happen if we were given 24 hours to surrender our weapons."
No, it is about what each individual US citizen would do.
Quote from the original post:
"So if you are a US citizen. What would you really do if you had 24 hours to surrender your weapons?",
"It wasn't about what the 13 colonies did, it's about what we would do. It's not about freedom of speech, it's about the right to bear arms."
Giving reasons to support a persons position is considered proper in most debates.
"it's about the right to bear arms."
No, it is not.We all ready have that right. It is about taking that right away.
Why do you continually try and change the topic?
senojekips
Active member
Believe me it's a joke, a stupid joke with no validity, but never the less, only a joke.
No one said it would happen overnight in your country, however a hypothetical question was raised asking what would you do if it did happen.
Nothing is free, including your much vaunted "freedom of speech" There are books full of laws regarding what you may or may not say. You believe far too much of your own propaganda.
There is none so blind as he who does not want to see.
Very very poor, obviously you are struggling here. Even more stupid than your comment about me having "given up" my right the own firearms. (shakes head).
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
There's really only one way we know the answer for all this.
It's a bit like asking a guy what he'll be like and what he'll do in the event of a large scale war (I'm talking about stuff with WWI, WWII and Korea casualty figures). No one knows until he actually goes off to war and take part. Before you engage the enemy lots of folks talk smack about what they'll do etc etc only to realize that the reality is different.
I think the same can be said about this really. Lots of folks will scream "over my dead body" etc etc but when it really comes down to it, no one knows what the people in this forum or anywhere for that matter will act.
Hopefully such a day will not come. At least, not anytime soon.
It's a bit like asking a guy what he'll be like and what he'll do in the event of a large scale war (I'm talking about stuff with WWI, WWII and Korea casualty figures). No one knows until he actually goes off to war and take part. Before you engage the enemy lots of folks talk smack about what they'll do etc etc only to realize that the reality is different.
I think the same can be said about this really. Lots of folks will scream "over my dead body" etc etc but when it really comes down to it, no one knows what the people in this forum or anywhere for that matter will act.
Hopefully such a day will not come. At least, not anytime soon.
Chukpike
Banned
Whatever (shakes head)
5.56X45mm
Milforum Mac Daddy
You need to remember that the Constitution was not written to empower the people; it was written to deny power to the federal government. The Constitution was meant to be a very heavy set of chains to keep the central, federal government in slavery to the States and people. Jefferson, Madison, Patrick Henry, and most others distrusted "consolidated power" and wanted to keep most power closest to the people (not anonymous and remote), to keep politicians in fear of the people.
I can think of only one group politicians fear today. It's a conservative, armed, religious, right. What they call "Fly Over Country" and "People who cling to their guns and religion".
I can think of only one group politicians fear today. It's a conservative, armed, religious, right. What they call "Fly Over Country" and "People who cling to their guns and religion".
Rob Henderson
Banned
Yet you (and others) were arguing it as valid in the debate.... By answering that part of the post, you tried to make it part of the argument.
Very good... And I didn't say anything otherwise... Simply what would happen if we (US citizens) would do if we were given 24 hours to surrender our weapons.
So... If we were having a debate on women's rights, could I use the Middle Ages as a valid example? I didn't think so. Two different times. You'll have to come up with something a little more recent than 200+ years ago. Just goes to show how many holes are actually in your argument...
It's still about that right... I didn't say it was about trying to gain it... I said it was about the right itself... Read Chukpike.
Wait.... What? You think the Constitution wasn't written to empower the people?!?! That's probably the scariest thing I've ever read on this forum! OF COURSE it was written to empower the people... That's why any rights not specifically mentioned in the Constitution went to the States and to the people. To make sure the people held the cards.5.56X45mm said:
I promise you, they do NOT fear them for the reasons you think they do. They fear them because they see that survival of the fittest, adapting to your new environment, CHANGE is the only way to live in this modern age, and that conservative, armed, religious right is ALWAYS opposed to it. There's a reason the symbol for the Republican Party is a donkey... Donkey's are stubborn... And stubborn refusal to accept change is NOT going to do America a whole lot of good. We can see how much it's done it in the past....5.56X45mm said:
major liability
Active member
Actually, it's the elephant. A creature known for its memory. Maybe they remember why the 2nd Amendment is necessary in the first place. CHANGE is not the only mode. Change when you must, and when it will benefit America. Don't do it because it's the trendy rallying cry these days. Hopefully in the end Obama will prove a centrist who disappoints his supporters and disproves his critics.
Rob Henderson
Banned
You're right... I really don't know why I said that..... Twisting it to my own ends I suppose.... It fit well though, didn't it?
The 2nd Amendment is necessary to American survival. Yes, I said it. You can copy it and quote me whenever you like, because my position on that won't change any time soon. What ISN'T necessary to American survival is having access to the same type and amount of weapons as one of the top militaries in the world.
When it gets down to brass tacks... If I was asked to surrender my weapons... I would. There's no reason for me to be harmed over a few pieces of metal. I'd raise all hell politically, and I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one... But no, I would not DIE defending my right to keep guns.
Chukpike
Banned
You're right... I really don't know why I said that..... Twisting it to my own ends I suppose.... It fit well though, didn't it?
I'm pretty sure your college would appreciate you not telling anyone you go there.:lol:
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
Back duirng the war of independence, it wasn't like a bunch of random guys got together and decided "alright, we're going to kick some ass!"
It was well organized with rich and influential people being key players in the struggle. Now unless there is a repeat of this, there will be no organized armed struggle of any kind. Like Spike said, there would be a few guys getting their asses handed over to them by SWAT teams.
Major liability has a good point here. Also a call to change is always a risky adventure that must be conducted only when the situation looks to be heading towards the hopeless end of things.
The better way to do things, especially if it has served you well, is not to really "change" but to evolve. Bring what you have to the current level of science, knowledge and experience. Radical conservativism is a bit like a guy trying to stay childish because he can't deal with the real world. Likewise radical progressives are like folks who like to speed in their motorbikes with blind folds on.
If the second ammendment is truly challenged to the point where its existence looks to be terminated in a short while, there needs to be a capable leader with the resources and knowledge of how to organize a proper sort of resistance that uses political, economic, and if it comes down to it, martial force. He must be willing to go through with this at the cost of his own life. Also this leader should also be surrounded by smart, capable and resourceful people ready to back him up with their lives. Truth is, I don't really see the militias playing any role unless they are willing to submit to such a person or people (which I'm sure they have too much ego to do).
It was well organized with rich and influential people being key players in the struggle. Now unless there is a repeat of this, there will be no organized armed struggle of any kind. Like Spike said, there would be a few guys getting their asses handed over to them by SWAT teams.
Major liability has a good point here. Also a call to change is always a risky adventure that must be conducted only when the situation looks to be heading towards the hopeless end of things.
The better way to do things, especially if it has served you well, is not to really "change" but to evolve. Bring what you have to the current level of science, knowledge and experience. Radical conservativism is a bit like a guy trying to stay childish because he can't deal with the real world. Likewise radical progressives are like folks who like to speed in their motorbikes with blind folds on.
If the second ammendment is truly challenged to the point where its existence looks to be terminated in a short while, there needs to be a capable leader with the resources and knowledge of how to organize a proper sort of resistance that uses political, economic, and if it comes down to it, martial force. He must be willing to go through with this at the cost of his own life. Also this leader should also be surrounded by smart, capable and resourceful people ready to back him up with their lives. Truth is, I don't really see the militias playing any role unless they are willing to submit to such a person or people (which I'm sure they have too much ego to do).
Chukpike
Banned
"rich and influential people being key players in the struggle."
Apparently, you think anyone who owns is a gun is a poor backwoods hick.
Owning quality weapons and buying ammunition ain't cheap.
Major liability had a great point! "CHANGE is not the only mode. Change when you must, and when it will benefit America. Don't do it because it's the trendy rallying cry these days."
Your point, "Also a call to change is always a risky adventure."
Is not entirely true. Change is inevitable just like death and taxes.
But, a radical change like this thread is about. Taking guns away in 24 hours is definitely a "risky adventure".
As for Spike's scenario
"Like Spike said, there would be a few guys getting their asses handed over to them by SWAT teams."
Let me give you a little glue of what could happen.
"The FBI has credited to eco-terrorism 200 million dollars in property damage from 2003 and 2008, and a majority of states within the USA have introduced laws aimed at eco-terrorism."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecoterrorism
This from tree huggers and animal rights activist. Very little of it if any done with guns. This from people who like bunnies and don't shoot them.
'"change" but to evolve" Change or evolve, really the same thing, but your point is well taken
"capable leader with the resources and knowledge of how to organize a proper sort of resistance"
I take it you think that, no where in the US could leaders be found. Doesn't say much for the current leadership in the US government.
"Truth is, I don't really see the militias playing any role unless they are willing to submit to such a person or people (which I'm sure they have too much ego to do)."
Might want to look up the definition of Militia. Militias operate under a command structure and are used to following orders from their leaders.
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
Actually Chupike, you made most of that stuff up.
My point is, unless rich, powerful and influential leaders actually stand up to the point that they will lay down their lives for the cause when the time comes, it's over. No, I don't have this belief that gun owners are poor and backward. If it were legal, I'd be a gun owner as well.
Yeah I understand what a f*cking militia is. But what you're missing out on, is a lot of half assed third world tinpot piece of f*cking crap Armies also have leaders and a command structure and they didn't impress much at all.
Eco-terrorists may have caused damage but the effect of their efforts? Nothing. Not a damn thing has changed as a result of their actions.
Going back to the point: how the American public would react to such a measure is something we can only tell once such an event has occured. Why someone would get so defensive about that is beyond me. Unless they know they'll actually give up without a fight and feel ashamed about it.
My point is, unless rich, powerful and influential leaders actually stand up to the point that they will lay down their lives for the cause when the time comes, it's over. No, I don't have this belief that gun owners are poor and backward. If it were legal, I'd be a gun owner as well.
Yeah I understand what a f*cking militia is. But what you're missing out on, is a lot of half assed third world tinpot piece of f*cking crap Armies also have leaders and a command structure and they didn't impress much at all.
Eco-terrorists may have caused damage but the effect of their efforts? Nothing. Not a damn thing has changed as a result of their actions.
Going back to the point: how the American public would react to such a measure is something we can only tell once such an event has occured. Why someone would get so defensive about that is beyond me. Unless they know they'll actually give up without a fight and feel ashamed about it.
Chukpike
Banned
"you made most of that stuff up."
What did I make up?
"If it were legal, I'd be a gun owner as well."
Who's getting defensive?
"Why someone would get so defensive about that is beyond me. Unless they know they'll actually give up without a fight and feel ashamed about it."
Sounds like the voice of experience.
Rob Henderson
Banned
I suppose that's why I'm not a PolySci major... I'm a music major. I wouldn't get that wrong. But again, you've completely avoided my last post. Bravo. I commend you on your obviously superior selective reading genes.
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
"If it were legal, I'd be a gun owner as well."
Who's getting defensive?
"Why someone would get so defensive about that is beyond me. Unless they know they'll actually give up without a fight and feel ashamed about it."
Sounds like the voice of experience.
Chupike, did you leave a good portion of your brain on a cruise or something?
Or did you major in English at some point in your life? Because you talk like one. They all have one thing in common: the ability to send any argument off into irrelevent tangents.
But if you ask me, between fighting for a completely lost cause for people that aren't worth my time and effort and packing up and leaving, I take packing up and leaving. The world is big and there are plenty of places to go.
And just how is "if it were legal, I'd be a gun owner as well" being defensive?
"Why someone would get so defensive about that is beyond me. Unless they know they'll actually give up without a fight and feel ashamed about it."
No, that part is about you.
Chukpike
Banned
Maybe, but I am not the one packing up and running.
As the topic title asks, Are Americans any Different, I believe the answer is yes.
Rob Henderson
Banned
You'll never know until the men in black come a-knockin'. For all the fighting and bickering you do on the internet, I'd say you'd throw the keys to the gun safe and run to the bedroom.
I believe some Americans are different, but hell, some British were different, some Aussies were different. It's gonna take a lot more than the current gun nut population to put up enough resistance to successfully rebel against a gun collection.
I believe some Americans are different, but hell, some British were different, some Aussies were different. It's gonna take a lot more than the current gun nut population to put up enough resistance to successfully rebel against a gun collection.
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
Maybe, but I am not the one packing up and running.
As the topic title asks, Are Americans any Different, I believe the answer is yes.
Sure go ahead and waste your time trying to change something you can't change. If the majority of the population says they want the country to be a certain way, have enough discipline and cohesion to make the changes happen etc., it's really time for you to fit in or go.
In my situation, either I can try to change thousands of years of pain-in-the-ass tradition or I can do everyone a favor by leaving. I elect leaving. It saves me the time and energy I can use on more useful things.
I won't stand my ground if no one wants me there. I'll move on and fight for someone else. Actually, that's how America came about to be.
Chukpike
Banned
What are you talking about? This thread is not about change. Did you post on the wrong thread?
"it's really time for you to fit in or go."
Here in the US there is no requirement to "fit in". When the going gets tough, as you have all ready stated, leaving is what you do.
"I'll move on and fight for someone else."
Who would want you? You have explained your willingness to give up. As far as fighting, from your own statements, that isn't going to happen.
Look at your little slogan.
"I sold my soul to the devil, and the price was cheap."
More likely you couldn't give it away.