Started By
Message
re: Stand up comedian Jim Jefferies on Gun Control
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:17 am to AUbagman
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:17 am to AUbagman
quote:
If you think you have a reason to kill someone, you'll do it, regardless if you have a gun or not.
Maybe so, but it would be a lot harder if you didn't have a gun.
I'd like my chances against a guy with a knife or hammer better than a guy with a gun.
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 8:21 am
0
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:19 am to Aubie Spr96
quote:
Here's an idea, why don't we reduce the size of the military instead?
I'm for greatly reducing the size of the military AND more gun control.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:20 am to Phat Phil
Gun control is lacking in America if criminals didn't have ready access to guns they would throw rocks and sticks at you and children wouldn't die.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:26 am to butterball101
If Americans gave up their guns, what happens on a worldwide scale? Who would then be able to keep the governments of the world in check?
We're about the only nation in the world (other than Switzerland) with guns. We keep the Federal government in check. As a nation, we, in turn, keep the rest of the world in check (to some extent) in terms of oppression. If Americans gave up their guns, the entire checks and balances system is broken down.
How many of you REALLY think that wouldn't eventually result in A)World government and B)Mass oppression? How many times in the history of the world has there NOT resulted in totalitarianism when you remove all checks and balances?
We're about the only nation in the world (other than Switzerland) with guns. We keep the Federal government in check. As a nation, we, in turn, keep the rest of the world in check (to some extent) in terms of oppression. If Americans gave up their guns, the entire checks and balances system is broken down.
How many of you REALLY think that wouldn't eventually result in A)World government and B)Mass oppression? How many times in the history of the world has there NOT resulted in totalitarianism when you remove all checks and balances?
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:29 am to Bama3714
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:38 am to Stonehog
quote:
The intention of the 2nd amendment is no longer realistic today.
The idea was to make it easier for people to overthrow the government if it became tyrannical. There's no way that could happen now with the size of the U.S. military.
So you are concerned about civilians killing each other, but not concerned with a tyrannical government killing its citizens? Do you feel this way because your whole life has been spent sucking off the government teet, or because you have never opened a history book?
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:44 am to pvilleguru
???
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:49 am to PrivatePublic
So you REALLY think that the general public would stand no chance against the US military, especially considering that many in the US military would side with the people? Now, the citizens may not topple the government, but do you not see that it prevents oppression?
Again, see my post above. What happens when there is literally NO checks and balances system to any of the governments in the entire world? What event in world history makes ANYBODY think that anything but really bad things would transpire?
Again, see my post above. What happens when there is literally NO checks and balances system to any of the governments in the entire world? What event in world history makes ANYBODY think that anything but really bad things would transpire?
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:50 am to Bama3714
quote:
???
Oh, you were being serious?
In that case...
Posted on 8/31/15 at 8:59 am to pvilleguru
The scenario is anything but a joke. If you can't see that that's not only a feasible possibility, but a likely scenario, you're not wanting to see it. What I'm mentioning isn't some lone-wolf, maverick position. It's a pretty common sentiment. You apparently think it's unlikely. You do realize that the past couple hundred years has been the relative least oppressive period of time in human history, don't you?
But nah... let's change all of that.
But nah... let's change all of that.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:04 am to Bama3714
quote:
You do realize that the past couple hundred years has been the relative least oppressive period of time in human history, don't you?
And you think that is because American citizens have guns?
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:09 am to PrivatePublic
quote:
The intention of the 2nd amendment is no longer realistic today. The idea was to make it easier for people to overthrow the government if it became tyrannical. There's no way that could happen now with the size of the U.S. military.
So you are concerned about civilians killing each other, but not concerned with a tyrannical government killing its citizens? Do you feel this way because your whole life has been spent sucking off the government teet, or because you have never opened a history book?
Seems he's more of a troll, since he actually knows what the 2nd Amendment was put into place for. And partially stupid. To think the Gov't would actually try to take firearms by force from it's citizens at this point.
People forget and ignore that framers of the Constitution saw fit that the People are GUARANTEED certain Rights, not GRANTED certain Rights.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:12 am to pvilleguru
Obviously the American Constitution has a lot to do with it since so many other nations incorporated so many of our principles into their Constitutions.
Let me just ask you two questions point blank.
1)Do you really honestly trust the governments of the world in a scenario where none of the people in ANY of the nations had a means to defend themselves?
2)Name me one single means of resisting totalitarian oppression in that scenario.
If you can honestly answer "Yes" to the first question, God help you. Because you need it.
Let me just ask you two questions point blank.
1)Do you really honestly trust the governments of the world in a scenario where none of the people in ANY of the nations had a means to defend themselves?
2)Name me one single means of resisting totalitarian oppression in that scenario.
If you can honestly answer "Yes" to the first question, God help you. Because you need it.
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 9:14 am
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:13 am to PrivatePublic
quote:
not concerned with a tyrannical government killing its citizens?
I don't think that could happen in the US in the age of the internet.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:17 am to Bama3714
Why isn't all of Europe being oppressed by their government? Didn't you say only the Swiss have guns? American citizens sure aren't protecting them because we can't bring guns on international flights.
And US citizens sure aren't going to Africa with guns blazing.
And US citizens sure aren't going to Africa with guns blazing.
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 9:19 am
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:23 am to pvilleguru
You really think Europe could begin oppressing their citizens without having to answer to us? Seriously?
How are you not following this?
Step 1 --> American citizens have guns. Therefore...
Step 2 --> Keeps the government in check. As the (by far) most powerful nation in the world, this..
Step 3 --> Keeps the rest of the nations in check (at least those that are "Democracies" (even though we aren't a Democracy).
How are you not following this?
Step 1 --> American citizens have guns. Therefore...
Step 2 --> Keeps the government in check. As the (by far) most powerful nation in the world, this..
Step 3 --> Keeps the rest of the nations in check (at least those that are "Democracies" (even though we aren't a Democracy).
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:27 am to Bama3714
quote:
How are you not following this?
Because your 3 step plan doesn't work that way. Let's say shite happens in Europe and the US government does nothing. What are the American citizens going to do? Start shooting government officials?
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 9:27 am
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:29 am to pvilleguru
quote:
I don't think that could happen in the US in the age of the internet.
But pray tell, what would an informed but unarmed populace of twitter verse users be able to do about it?
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:32 am to PrivatePublic
quote:
But pray tell, what would an informed but unarmed populace of twitter verse users be able to do about it?
Vote people out well before it reaches that point? They aren't suddenly going to get rid of term limits, etc.
It's already nearly impossible to elect a president that is too far left or right.
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 9:36 am
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:36 am to pvilleguru
At the end of the day, they willingly gave their guns up, so they would get what they bargained for.
But if that scenario occurred, do you not think that would result in one heck of a political nightmare for us to act? You really think nothing would be done?
By the way, you still haven't answered those questions I asked. You're too busy laughing, apparently. Slaphappy this morning?
But if that scenario occurred, do you not think that would result in one heck of a political nightmare for us to act? You really think nothing would be done?
By the way, you still haven't answered those questions I asked. You're too busy laughing, apparently. Slaphappy this morning?
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News