The gun thread, reloaded.
- Thread starter 23536
- Start date
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
Wrong on all accounts, try again.
I don't, though. And neither do you.
There are regulars on the forums that know me quite personally. All I've got to go on regarding you is what you want us to believe.
maybe.
here's how's it's defined in the 2nd amendment: "Arms".
it doesn't define the term so it's open to interpretation. those who lean right (for want of a better term) seem to think they have a monopoly on that definition but they don't. they get incandescent with rage when somebody suggests a limit with which they disagree but "well of course they didn't mean nuclear arms or biological weapons!")...
the funny thing is most people agree that a line needs to be drawn somewhere - it's a simple disagreement over where exactly.
alasdair
Droppersneck
Bluelighter
Just going by what you have told me over the past few years.
I read your shit which although not a rant made about as much sense as a Parrot on Salvia. Then again that's my mistake and not yours
Have you forgotten in your self absorbed brain that outside of this message board i have not the foggiest fucking idea as to who you are? To the best of my knowledge we have never talked to each other outside of this forum so how in the name of holy fuck can i know you have more experience in such and such then anybody else on here? I think i remember you mentioning you are from Florida and that your a Right Libertarian (as is evidenced by that black flag that looks like someone pissed on half of it) but that's about it. Sorry but i am not going to take your word as gospel and i would be rather foolish to do so.
As to anyone ragging on Joe about being in the Army (if he ever was but i will give him the benefit of the doubt on this) i don't agree with that. That could easily have been any of us including myself. Where i come from it was one of the very few opportunities to get out of here and see the world abit and i don't blame anyone for choosing that. If he had become a cop then by all means yes hate away at him for that alone. About the only reason i didn't end up in the Army myself was because i realized i would be fighting for a country that treated me and my people with nothing but contempt and treated our island as nothing more then a colony to be exploited for the gains of the federal government. If i was ever going to pick up a gun and accept the fact that i would have to kill people and possibly die for my beliefs it would be to fight for the interests of the working class not for the interests of the elite.
I'll criticize Joe for his views on well just about everything politically (okay we are both anti-gun control but that's it) but criticizing him for being in the Army is just a low blow in my opinion.
^ if that is directed at me, I wasn't necessarily being disparaging about having been in the armed services, but rather, how it was being used as a one-up in reply to some comment.
"How many years combat did you serve?" is - to my mind - revealing as to the poster's belligerence.
Nobody's judging for being in the army, but gloating about it like it's something people ought to bow down to.
I respect soldiers as much as the poster in question respects the poor. So be it.
"How many years combat did you serve?" is - to my mind - revealing as to the poster's belligerence.
Nobody's judging for being in the army, but gloating about it like it's something people ought to bow down to.
I respect soldiers as much as the poster in question respects the poor. So be it.
Joeof1
Bluelighter
^^ No. Belligerence is a civilian telling a person that slept with his rifle for several years that you have more experience with firearms.
Where did I mention my respect for the poor? I used to be poor. I was homeless for 3 years knuckle dragger. I have no respect for homeless people that put themselves there and blame everyone else.
I have never said I was from Florida. I have lived in Florida, but I was born into a military family. In fact, I have no idea what you are talking about. I was referring to Bardo, you, I don't care about you... You've been an angry crank since you joined.
Just the things that are still left out from when I was in. I'm packing so nothing else is out. Two coins awarded to me by two different two star generals. One coin from CSM Redmore, perhaps the hardest set of woodpecker lips on the planet, and my blue cord from the day I turned blue.
Where did I mention my respect for the poor? I used to be poor. I was homeless for 3 years knuckle dragger. I have no respect for homeless people that put themselves there and blame everyone else.
I have never said I was from Florida. I have lived in Florida, but I was born into a military family. In fact, I have no idea what you are talking about. I was referring to Bardo, you, I don't care about you... You've been an angry crank since you joined.
Just the things that are still left out from when I was in. I'm packing so nothing else is out. Two coins awarded to me by two different two star generals. One coin from CSM Redmore, perhaps the hardest set of woodpecker lips on the planet, and my blue cord from the day I turned blue.
Last edited:
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
Must have me confused with someone else. I've never said the 2nd amendment is in place for hunting or home defense. I have however, stated that it was put in place in order to form an early American defense system. Back when there were 5 million (white) citizens occupying a very large plot of land with no applicable defense against invasions from other countries, slave revolts, tax rebellions or crime. It's not there to kill the president or take over the country. The only reason I say this is because sedition is also explicitly outlawed in the exact same document that grants the 2nd amendment.
I also don't favor more or less gun control. I favor different control. Stronger restrictions in some areas, and much less severe restrictions in others.
Joeof1
Bluelighter
It was put in place to prevent would be conquerors from revisiting the idea of American colonies.
Laws are written by the rich and connected. Kind of like fishing for terrorists is done on sites focused on illegal activities.
Laws are written by the rich and connected. Kind of like fishing for terrorists is done on sites focused on illegal activities.
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
Indeed. See: war of 1812
For an example of how the LIVE people who wrote the constitution felt about overthrowing domestic tyranny, see: Shay's Rebellion.
JackiePeyton
Ex-Bluelighter
This is all TLDR.
Don't take my guns.
Use them wisely.
No need for machine gun style type weapons.
done
Don't take my guns.
Use them wisely.
No need for machine gun style type weapons.
done
Joeof1
Bluelighter
Is that supposed to somehow negate the meaning behind the 2nd Amendment? If it is, it only displays that the people in power need to be countered.
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
Well, the first part was me agreeing with you.
The 2nd part was just me reiterating what I said in post 850, specifically this:
The 2nd part was just me reiterating what I said in post 850, specifically this:
JackiePeyton
Ex-Bluelighter
You've been reading Howard Zinn or something haven't you
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
All in all, I don't believe standing in trenches firing at the US army is necessary to keep social, economic and political leaders in their place. It would be a pointless effort right off the bat and would serve only as an absolute last resort.
With hundreds of millions of cyber warefare experts around the word, and many very capable tacticians inside the US, reigning in the government or even a successful revolution would result in very little small arms combat.
With hundreds of millions of cyber warefare experts around the word, and many very capable tacticians inside the US, reigning in the government or even a successful revolution would result in very little small arms combat.
Joeof1
Bluelighter
Which is merely an extension of your cognitive bias and dissonance. If you support the existence of a 2nd Amendment, you can only support it for it's original intention, to overthrow tyranny should the need arise.
This whole; "...it's not meant to give the people a way out of tyranny" idea is a fallacy, as they were very specific in their personal writings about what the intention was.
It was to make it so Billy-Bob down the street can kill every single "Red" he see's when they come to try and take the nation. We called you guys Red's back then too. Imperialists are always Red's.
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
But you see, the whole "tyranny escape button" was left out of what would later become law. What did become law was the explicit ban on attempting such an overthrow. Thomas Paine wrote books and pamphlets of agrarian justice and universal humanism. This did not become law.
Joeof1
Bluelighter
First, we have to ignore that gun control is a property right's issue, so we are assuming that we are ignoring that. Now we are presuming to ignore that the law doesn't include the philosophical impact, because it was the dawn of the only real Enlightened Era in the US history. Which means that writing was taking on a more technical direction in formal settings.
However, in order to do that, we have to presume humans can "create"(enumerate) real "Laws" though. Since you are calling this 2nd Amendment a "Law", that means it's immutable by natural means. Which means that no matter how much effort you apply, this will always exist. Even in outright national bans there are handguns all over Australia. So as we can see, it's a real "Law". No matter how much effort you put into it, there will be people that take it upon themselves to defend themselves. They will find a way to get weapons.
So the Second Amendment is a real "Law", in the traditional definition, and you would presume to do what to it exactly? Force it to exist in some other way, because you disagree with it?
You are obviously missing what they were saying when they wrote it. The first two Amendments were the reason the Bill of Right's were created. It was to enumerate this natural law into the Constitution, unfortunately in order for them to make it happen, they had to make a deal with the Red's that lived here. There's always imperialists that want to piss in someone's applesauce and tax him for the value added to it.