ELECTION 2008 | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB



Go Back   World Affairs Board > General Forums > 2008 US Presidential Election
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 05-14-2008, 21:57 PM   #91 (permalink)
7thsfsniper
DEVOUT BIKER
Military Professional
 
7thsfsniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-29-08
Location: Missouri, pron"misery"
Posts: 872
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by antimony View Post
I think the keyword is "control", rather than prohibition. Any good gun control law would deter guns appearing in the hands of irresponsible members of societies, such as felons, addicts, alcoholics and the like while not deterrng gun ownership by law abiding resposible citizens. .
There are no "good" gun control laws. There are already plenty of laws prohibiting felons and nuts from owning guns. Enforcement of those laws is what is needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by antimony View Post
Furthermore, I believe that in this day and age, there are enough legal means to counter state actions without resorting to the Anti-Federalist view of using popular militia to counter state tyranny..
Don't count on it. History has repeated itself time and again. Violence will always be the ultimate solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by antimony View Post
Also, what about those citizens who are not interested in bearing arms? Would the arms-bearing population then not be in a poistion to lord over these unarmed citizens, especially if no check is done to ensure that irresponsible members of the society do not get arms in any way?.
That is why I have guns and lots of ammo. I also speak Spanish so I can lord over them too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by antimony View Post
I am sure there would be countless threads in WAB on this. I would be hapy to thrash this out in those threads, without further hijacking this one.
Exactly what I was thinking. I'll check for a 2nd ammend thread and if there isn't one I'll start it.
__________________
The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten
7thsfsniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2008, 22:09 PM   #92 (permalink)
7thsfsniper
DEVOUT BIKER
Military Professional
 
7thsfsniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-29-08
Location: Missouri, pron"misery"
Posts: 872
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Army5339 View Post
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest thing. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling, which thinks that nothing is worth war, is much worse. The man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature, and has no chance of ever being free unless made or kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."---John Stuart Mill
An English liberal in the 1800s must have been worlds different than a modern American liberal. Could you even imagine barack, teddy, hillary or any of them saying that. John Kerry, "we will send a strongly worded objection to them" Kerry, what a turd!

Army, you are on your game my friend, excellent quote!
7thsfsniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2008, 01:25 AM   #93 (permalink)
7thsfsniper
DEVOUT BIKER
Military Professional
 
7thsfsniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-29-08
Location: Missouri, pron"misery"
Posts: 872
Country:
Ok, so we don't have to hijack this thread anymore..................The Disarming of America

This should do.
7thsfsniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2008, 11:23 AM   #94 (permalink)
astralis
Foreign Service
Moderator
Lei Feng Protege
 
Join Date: 08-23-05
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,946
Country:
oscar,

Quote:

Well, the liberties came first with 150 years of English domination and the legal and judicial system you inherited from them.
which the british at the time abused. in the UK, lacking the guns of the frontier, took approximately another 50-100 years (depending on which Reform you want to use) to gain the liberties Americans enjoyed. and this was in by far the most enlightened empire of the time.

Quote:

Sheep's mentality was the last chance you gt to survive under Mao or Stalin's rule it's bad but it's better than dead. And the independence of the judiciary is written in the constitution in every normal democracy and more decisively in people's minds.

Just an example: when Jean-Marie Le Pen went second during the French presidential election of 2002 people took up to the streets and voted en masse to get him back into his foxhole. We didn't need weapons to defend democracy because you don't need to... Russians and East Europeans didn't need them when they faced the Soviet Union in 1989. For the Jews, some tried to resist and died heroically, but the great majority of them were sent to death without necessitating the use of violence.
under stalin and mao, guns were outlawed. one had to act like a sheep because one had little choice (and even then, there were many, many, bloody riots). guns give you that choice between resisting tyranny and bowing to it.

your use of the french case is poor because we're talking about a second-rate racist fool getting knocked down by normal democratic procedures. it is when the threat is not second-rate that guns come into play.

as for the russians and east europeans....why did you think that was the case, that they got to revolt? had something to do with the USSR massively reforming, in very large part because of US-caused pressure in the Cold War. in 1956 and 1968, the USSR crushed peaceful demonstrations (which rapidly became unpeaceful) with armed force.

finally, as for the jews, what the hell? without "necessitating the use of violence"?? are you saying that it was a GOOD thing that most of them went out peacefully?? most of them were defenseless and went to their death like sheep, never believing that a sane government could destroy them. once they figured that they weren't going to survive, no matter how sheep-like they were, they fought. how different things would have been were they armed in the first place.

guns have but one serious place in a democracy, and that is as a very potent persuader for the State to remain democratic. it is the ultimate protector of minority rights when rule of law fails.

Quote:
In a democracy you don't get 40% of the vote by threatening people.(See an imperfect one like Pakistan where fundamentalists were crushed) Lots of Germans chose Hitler deliberately. Democracy without liberalism would best define Nazi Germany.
in an illiberal democracy you do. germans chose hitler deliberately because by the time he forced a vote, he had controlled the organs of the media, large portions of the state, had an illegal mob, and contravened rule of law many, many times. and illiberal democracy is only one step away from authoritarianism/totalitarianism. hitler used the guise of democracy as long as he felt it aided his cause.


Quote:

How many people got killed and how many others will be to preserve this last resort against tyranny?
however many such a number is, FAR FAR LESS than the number of people that die in a tyrannical system. mao, stalin, hitler, pol pot, just four dictators out of a population of far more, through their wars, massacres, and ethnic cleansing killed over 100 million people. this was only possible because their ego was powered by a State which commonly used its monopoly on violence to terrorize their own defenseless populace- and to get such a populace to terrorize others.

/end thread hijack
__________________
Never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same weapons of reason which today arm you against the present.

-Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Last edited by astralis : 05-15-2008 at 11:27 AM.
astralis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2008, 11:41 AM   #95 (permalink)
Ray
Postmaster General
Military Professional
 
Ray's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-20-03
Posts: 26,149
Country:
Quote:
What if Barack Obama were a real Muslim?

What if Barack Obama were a real Muslim? | The Japan Times Online
Posted without comment.
__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Last edited by Ray : 05-16-2008 at 11:46 AM.
Ray is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rove on the Hotseat? Broken Political Discussions 370 03-23-2007 08:57 AM
Is Mullah Osama.. errrr... Barack Obama done troung 2008 US Presidential Election 242 02-16-2007 17:34 PM
Pakistan's super elite poor platinum786 Political Discussions 12 05-30-2006 22:01 PM
The real story Joe Wilson's twisted tale Leader Political Discussions 48 11-03-2005 10:09 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:01 PM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8