|
|
Post by TW on Dec 26, 2012 8:11:24 GMT -5
I don't remember there being any thought on the part of the founding fathers that there would be semi, and automatic handguns available to people for a few bucks - Nor assault rifles.
Their knowledge of personal weapons that used gun powder was related to muzzle loading choices which often took minutes to reload.
They probably would have grabbed their heads in horror if they saw what their decision has allowed people to claim.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Dec 26, 2012 18:49:39 GMT -5
Happypacker: How many dead are acceptable? The argument that banning AR's will result in less dead, still leaves dead bodies on the ground.
As one man said, "its not the gun that kills, its the hearts of men that kill." I stand by my statement that the government has usurped the authority of discipline in the family.
TW: I agree with you that the Founding Fathers would be boggled by the weapons of today.
I am not sure if I have stated it here, but the Founding Fathers did have laws against owning weapons that caused "frightening" within the community such as cannons etc.
I think most would agree that a cannon in the 1700's can, at the very least, be comparable to AR's in today's society. There is no real reason to have AR's in this society, not for the reasons that Happypackers states, they simply run contrary to the notion of hunting and defensive posturing.
|
|
|
|
Post by happypacker on Dec 27, 2012 6:32:30 GMT -5
i am against those typ weapons, and if you think they have a use for the public please tell mr what they are, i used hunting as example, like you big hunters really nedd that weapon to shoot up a deer, how about a chipmonk?
and yes, people are more important than hunting, but that is the reasoning people use to want weapons, and to protect themselves? from what ,,,an invasion?
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Dec 27, 2012 15:01:00 GMT -5
i am against those typ weapons, and if you think they have a use for the public please tell mr what they are, i used hunting as example, like you big hunters really nedd that weapon to shoot up a deer, how about a chipmonk? and yes, people are more important than hunting, but that is the reasoning people use to want weapons, and to protect themselves? from what ,,,an invasion?[/quote The US Government, which controls the most awesome military...ever. |
|
|
|
Post by happypacker on Dec 28, 2012 7:00:03 GMT -5
your really not serious? what is your avorite sci fy movie? which side will the police fight on?
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Dec 30, 2012 18:28:42 GMT -5
your really not serious? what is your avorite sci fy movie? which side will the police fight on? Go read your history and report back to the forum what happens to an unarmed citizenry when they stand up to an unjust Government: Tienanmen square comes to mind, persecution of the Jews comes to mind. www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdfThen report back to what happens to an armed citizenry when they stand up to an unjust Government; American Revolution comes to mind. Quit acting like the Brown Shirts of Germany or the Red Coats of England by defending a Government that seems to do whatever it wishes, whenever it wishes enforcing whatever laws it feels like enforcing. And as far as who law enforcement fights for, they will either be an instrument of the Federal Government through state and local officials supporting the Federal Government or they will be by the very same in opposing the Federal government through State and local officials. This isn't rocket science. |
|
|
|
Post by TW on Dec 30, 2012 21:58:58 GMT -5
I'd consider that a reach. Nobody said total disarmament.
But, at the same time, nobody should be talking insurrection by arms, either.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Dec 30, 2012 23:02:41 GMT -5
Happypacker flat out asked who "they" had to protect themselves from,
How many people have died because someone had one stupid idea of thinking it was okay for the Government to disarm the citizens?
People who think its a good idea to disarm citizens: Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao Tse-Tung, Happypacker. Millions have died because of their views.
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Dec 31, 2012 0:04:56 GMT -5
You have too little faith in the population of the US, who also makes up the military, and quasi-military, as not being able to establish the difference between right and wrong.
Our military would never follow an unlawful order against the population.
Apparently you don't know the military codes.
|
|
|
|
Post by happypacker on Dec 31, 2012 7:31:59 GMT -5
[
The US Government, which controls the most awesome military...ever.[/quote]
you seem to go to extremes, so the entire govt. will work with the mighty military of this country and do what? IF true, do you really think that it would be worth the destruction? If no public they would not have anyone to rule over.and the economey would collaspe and secondly, how can the public armed stop the military? never going to happen. you watch to many sci fi movies and TV shows.
the chinese at Tin, was an incident, nothing else. the chinesee own the USA in borrowed money. that is how they could crumble the US.
the american revoltution,, that was europen immagrents rebelling against the British way of thinking that they were a coloney.and guess what, back then almost everyone as a citizen owned a gun, THEY HAD TO TO HUNT AND FEED THEMSELVES THE WAY OF WARFARE WAS DIFFEENT, PURE NUMBERS COULD TURN THE TIDE TO A VICTORY, NOT TODAY, THE MACHINES TODAY CAN AND DO OUT WEIGH THE NUMBERS, JUST LOOK AT THE iRAQ WAR WE WERE BADLY OUTNUMBERED BUT THE WEAPONS AND MACHINES MADE THE DIFFERENCE.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Dec 31, 2012 7:53:19 GMT -5
[ The US Government, which controls the most awesome military...ever. you seem to go to extremes, so the entire govt. will work with the mighty military of this country and do what? IF true, do you really think that it would be worth the destruction? If no public they would not have anyone to rule over.and the economey would collaspe and secondly, how can the public armed stop the military? never going to happen. you watch to many sci fi movies and TV shows. the chinese at Tin, was an incident, nothing else. the chinesee own the USA in borrowed money. that is how they could crumble the US. the american revoltution,, that was europen immagrents rebelling against the British way of thinking that they were a coloney.and guess what, back then almost everyone as a citizen owned a gun, THEY HAD TO TO HUNT AND FEED THEMSELVES THE WAY OF WARFARE WAS DIFFEENT, PURE NUMBERS COULD TURN THE TIDE TO A VICTORY, NOT TODAY, THE MACHINES TODAY CAN AND DO OUT WEIGH THE NUMBERS, JUST LOOK AT THE iRAQ WAR WE WERE BADLY OUTNUMBERED BUT THE WEAPONS AND MACHINES MADE THE DIFFERENCE.[/quote] How's that superior fire power working out in Afghanistan? You are very dismissive to history. Also, those in power, will go to great lengths to preserve that power even if they have to burn it all down and rebuild again. The "incident" at Tienanmen Square broke down barriers and created economic free trade zones that have bettered the lives of many Chinese. That was the concession the government made to weaken the opposition. That Revolution is still not over. As we all know, the Chinese do a lot of long range planning. The Red Coats had superior fire power and resources over the Revolutionaries and still lost. You undermine the tenacity of the human spirit to endure great hardships when they have righteousness on their side. No doubt and God forbid if a revolt would start in this country, there would be those who defer to the government for safety and security (mostly on the Northeast and West Coasts), but I also know this: Many would rather die on their American feet than serve on their Communist knees. PS. Quit criticizing my television viewing habits. |
|
|
|
Post by TW on Dec 31, 2012 12:42:16 GMT -5
You keep throwing out the debt to the Chinese like it was some onus of them controlling us.
We are further in debt to the Japanese, but you don't seem to follow that point on your beliefs.
I guess it's easier to make it sound scary if it's the Chinese, because of their government.
As far as the Chinese are concerned, they would never try to dictate a direction to the US except in trade. They use the indebtedness to ply us as a favored nation, since so much of their industrial base is actually co-owned with US interests.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Dec 31, 2012 12:49:00 GMT -5
No where remotely was a reference made to Chinese debt; flame on.  I might add that it is you, as well as millions of Americans, seem to follow the point of your belief that China will be playing second fiddle to the US Economy, in time, they won't need "Favored Nation" status. They'll dicate because of the strides of interdependence they have made into Russia, India and the rest of the Pacific Rim. Many Americans are going to struggle with this new found reality as they believe if you just bring the jobs back, that all will be as it was.  |
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Dec 31, 2012 13:05:34 GMT -5
You have too little faith in the population of the US, who also makes up the military, and quasi-military, as not being able to establish the difference between right and wrong. Our military would never follow an unlawful order against the population. Apparently you don't know the military codes. Apparently neither did the US Soldiers who initiated the Kent State Massacre. Never say never. Oh that's right, it was lawful because the students were demonized by the Governor and declared to be un-American revolutionaries seeking to destroy the education system in Ohio. |
|
|
|
Post by TW on Dec 31, 2012 13:06:39 GMT -5
All nations in what we call "the free world," will join to keep the Chinese from dominating world trade, simply because it would mean their own governments, and business interests, would be second world, if they allowed it.
Right now, the push in China is towards higher wages, and they will eventually fall into the same crunch factors as every other nation has, who has reached high industrialization potential.
They figure that within 20 years, they'll have serious labor problems in China, because they're already experiencing them due to the influx of Hong Kong influence on their labor markets. Once people realize they should have a fair wage, they will fight to get it. The sweat shop mentality will be gone, and the government sanctioning of it will end.
|
|
