| Author | Message | ||
     Greatlaker |
https://youtu.be/lL8JEEt2RxI | ||
| Strokizator |
Another foreigner telling us we should be more like them because they are so much smarter than us. What's new? | ||
| Ourdee |
A foreigner without a clue as to who the protection is from. No understanding of the founding fathers thoughts. I shut it off. And what a potty mouth to boot. | ||
| Alfau |
Fools with guns are dangerous. ISIS? http://www.vox.com/cards/things-about-isis-you-nee d-to-know/what-is-isis What about their guns! Should they have them? Stupid question I know but when in Rome! | ||
| Ducbsa |
 | ||
| Reepicheep |
Which they? ISIS? The guns aren't the point, the people are the point. I can (and have) sat in a room with 20 armed Americans, who were absolutely no threat to me whatsoever. Were I to walk into the wrong place in Iraq, with nobody armed, I would be unlikely to come out alive. When a US Citizen is justly convicted of a serious crime (we call them felonies), they loose several rights for the rest of their lives. One is the right to vote, another is the right to keep and bear arms. Both rights could be reinstated later by the courts if enough time has passed with exemplary behavior. Gun owners won't argue with you much about laws against criminals being armed. For example, we have lots of laws that say that if you are using a weapon in commission of a serious crime, you automatically get an X year extra sentence. These laws generally have wide support among lawful gun owners. | ||
| Greatlaker |
Ourdee. Do you think the founding fathers envisioned a United States beyond the agrarian society America was at the time? Do you think think the founding fathers were capable of imagining cars and planes and the power of the atom, the influence of cities and all the technology of present day? When Jefferson created the second amendment he was writing that text in the context of the America of that time, which was rural, sparse and largely armed with muskets. Do a few F-bombs really disturb you that much? I figured most of the guys on this site had thicker skin that that. If the F word disturbs you, just let me know and I will remove my original video link. | ||
| Court |
Guns . . until the next technical paradigm shift . . . are a necessary evil. If the Founding Father's could have glimpsed ahead and seen what we see today . . . they likely would not only have protected the right of citizens to own and bear arms, but would have required training and mandated concealed carry. If I were in that conversation . . . I'd suggest consequences dire enough to actually deter the use of guns in the commission of crimes. Laws to restrict guns don't work. Look no further than Chicago . . Washington, D.C. and New York City. I would not even get a gun within 200 miles of NYC, knowing the regulations, but criminals use them daily with little deterrent. There are places here in town you can hear the gunshots nightly. I've been shot and suspect that skews my perspective. Never again will I be caught in such a situation where I have to sit there and powerlessly watch a criminal continue to fire at me . . . unable to respond. What a shame that we even have to have this discussion. I'd love a gun free world . . . but the idea of a world where "gun free" excluded criminals is a dangerous place. Until that time . . . By the way . . . do you think the Founding Father's could ever have imagined a "weaponized" IRS, an Attorney General who endorses certain crime and rampant corruption? Guns, I'd submit, are among the least of our problems as a nation. | ||
| Bob_thompson |
Greatlaker: "When Jefferson created the second amendment he was writing that text in the context of the America of that time, which was rural, sparse and largely armed with muskets." I agree Gord but many of the "principals" of what our founding fathers stated in our Constitution will work even now especially the second amendment to always have the "citizens", not only the government armed as well as ALL of the Bill of Rights, the only country with such a document. | ||
| Reepicheep |
If Jefferson thought guns were just useful for farming, why is the second amendment specifically mentioned with a reference to a militia? | ||
| Court |
Greatlaker: I'm trying to understand your position that the Founding Father's envisioned ammo for agricultural society . . how would you explain these? Looks like the Feds are farming their asses off, eh?
| ||
| Sifo |
Do you think think the founding fathers were capable of imagining cars and planes and the power of the atom, the influence of cities and all the technology of present day? While I have doubts that they had the foresight to know exactly the example you pose, they certainly understood the advancement of technology. They were very well read and educated students of history. Note that the second amendment make no mention of "guns", "muskets", "flint lock rifles", "pistols", or any other specific weapons. It speaks only of "arms". These weren't laws that had to be passed to see what's in them either. These were laws that were debated, written, and rewritten numerous times before being passed in a quite arduous process. I'm quite certain that the term "arms" was chosen quote purposefully. They knew very well the continuous evolution of various types of "arms" through history up to that point. To surmise that they couldn't foresee that arms would continue to be developed and improved upon would go against all that we know about the founders. It would be akin to someone today having the belief that computers will not be more advanced in the future. Such an idea is simply absurd. So having dispensed with the absurd idea that they wouldn't expect "arms" to continue evolving, just as they have from the times when a bit of flint was tied to a stick with animal sinew, lets move on to the next absurd point being made. You assert that they would not have wanted a militia to be armed with modern arms of the times. Why would you ever even entertain the simple minded idea that a militia should be armed with antiques? Why didn't they write the second amendment to limit militias of their day to bows and arrows? That is basically what you are trying to assert they would have wanted for future generations. Fortunately, this assertion is just as absurd as the first one. Any reasonably thinking person can easily see the folly in these assertions. Now if someone wants to debate if the second amendment should be repealed or rewritten, that could be the basis for intelligent discussion. This ridiculous parsing of such simple, well debated language that makes up the second amendment is simply boring. | ||
| Bob_thompson |
No wonder I can hardly find a few bricks of .22 LR ammo for our fun/plinking shooting. When Midway gets some in, if I'm one hour late its gone. I wonder if getting rid of Obama will solve at least some of the problems. I hope so and I hope some of ammo already stockpiled will come on the market from the BS government. We need REAL change soon, not his (Obamas) BS change. He has definitely done an end around on gun control. | ||
| Gregtonn |
"...largely armed with muskets." A fallacious argument often used by stupid people who think we are as stupid as them. While the arms used may be primitive by today's standards they were state of the art at the time of the founding fathers. G | ||
| Aesquire |
If you could wave a magic wand and make all the guns on Earth disappear, violence would increase to medieval levels. There's an old saying, "God made man, Sam Colt made man equal". The 2 biggest technological factors in women's freedom are birth control pills, and repeating pistols. The repeating firearm makes a small, weak or crippled man or woman the equal of a large man with a club. Attacks normally come in gangs. You need more than one shot. A single shot flintlock pistol doesn't cut it in a city where 4-6 is the average number of guys beating someone to death. ( Local statistic. ) The founding fathers knew that "Arms" included swords, knives, bows, crossbows, and chemical fire arms. They not only knew, they wrote down the argument, so that the future would understand. Ignoring & re-writing history is the work of greedy evil men. Did Jefferson predict the relativistic weaponry of the 21st century? ( wait for it, you may be unlucky enough to live long enough to be a victim ) Thermonuclear weapons that can turn to glass an entire city? Not in detail, but he was well aware of the fate of Carthage. If you are not, then you are far more ignorant than he. Without guns, the strong and sociopathic rule. An expert with a sword, or a stick, or perhaps Bruce Lee can take on multiple attackers, but if you don't know the meaning of Riposte, Neuvieme or Seconde, you are lost. ( I don't mean the words, the Actions, and why ) I've spent over 20 years studying weaponed martial arts, and another 2 decades before that as a dilettante in open hand. | ||
| Aesquire |
While the arms used may be primitive by today's standards they were state of the art at the time of the founding fathers. True. And I will add that you are just as dead with a musket or dagger as with a gyrojet. | ||
| Rick_a |
It's convenient to blame the tool and complicated to deal with the root of the problem. Guns are an easy target for those with a progressive agenda over their simple subjects. The banned and "gun free" areas that are then subject to increased crime are then used as an example to perpetuate the lie. It's really quite a subtle yet destructive form of social engineering. As time goes on more people realize the folly of such ideals. "Gun Control" is a modern solution to a problem that never existed. I believe in freedom and personal accountability over nanny state politics and a false sense of security. | ||
| Strokizator |
Just for the record, Jefferson is not the author of the 2nd Amendment. That distinction falls on James Madison and George Mason. It was Mason who argued that to disarm the people was the best and most effectual way to enslave them. | ||
| Johnnylunchbox |
Lol, you guys sure do let this great laker fellow rile you up. | ||
| Aesquire |
On subjects other than politics, history, and human rights, GL has said some very sensible stuff. His comments on the Miata thread seems very thoughtful to me. Makes one wonder about bipolar personalities and the possibility of medical aid, but that's not my specialty, I do first responder, not chronic treatment. ( snark, snark ) There is a very funny bit near the beginning of the video ( I got bored after a minute or so ) to the effect that half of America said F*** you when it was proposed they just take some of the bigger guns..... It's a shining moment of truth that many of us refuse to take any incremental erosion of our civil rights, and a freudian comment on the American fascination with size....  | ||
| Ourdee |
I have a skin as thick as some peoples skulls. The use of of "phornicate" this and that gives me the impression of an individual that read three books because he was forced to. Just not my preference. As to the founding fathers wisdom; they created a republic not a democracy and to understand their mind set one should read the state constitutions that were written in their lifetimes. Look at how many colleges they started and how many books they wrote. The instructions given in judging a mans personal life as the basis for casting your votes for people to be placed into public office. Pay specific attention to instructions about religious convictions being a necessary qualifier. Don't delete a post or link once it is being discussed. The context of subsequent posts will be questioned without the reference point to explain the topic. The 2nd amendment had nothing to do with farming or hunting implements. It had all to do with real homeland security. Evil does not change do to new technology, it is still evil. The founding fathers knew that and addressed it. The keeping of a republic always falls on the shoulders of the next generation. | ||
| Johnnylunchbox |
Ourdee, your post reeks of introspection and self-awareness. How dare you bring well thought-out opinions to an argument with an irrational viewpoint? | ||
| Ourdee |
And a separate answer to address the imaginations of the founding fathers. I imagine that they had imaginations capable of superseding my own imagination. I envision information that travels beyond instantly. So fast in fact as to change back histories. I see men that had time on their hands to think and ponder at a depth we rarely glimpse. Deep calls to deep. I'm sure they were capable of imagining a day when men were no longer excellent to one another. That is what they were addressing, not how to regulate technology. A dollar bill is not evil or good, but loving it is the root of all evil. | ||
| Ourdee |
Johnny, Thanks for the chuckle. | ||
| Torquehd |
I always use a musket for planting the garden. Since Direct Fuel Injection exists, the outcome of the Battle of Hastings should be changed. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Yeah, and .357 sig is a great agricultural round... for all those coyotes wearing body armor. | ||
| Greatlaker |
So did anybody on this board actually watch the video??? I thought Jim Jefferies made some very astute observations in his comedic routine. I am surprised that no one here even is willing concede at least that. I guess the Badweb is 100% full of the 50% Jefferies' lampoons in his bit. It does sort of amaze me the gravitas that is placed amongst many here in the founding fathers and the constitution. Like the founding fathers were omnipotent and the constitution is a perfect piece of prose, yet it has all these amendments attached to it and the founding fathers were aristocratic, slave owning, plantation owners and lawyers. All in all, the Jim Jefferies video did make some interesting points so long as you can get past the "F"-bombs. | ||
| Greatlaker |
Sifo. Once again your rhetoric is getting under my skin. You claim I made assertions I didn't make. You have called me simple minded. Once again, I strongly doubt you would say that to me if I was standing in front of you. Once again, I am going to ask you to be more respectful. I asked Ourdee some question and for whatever reason you felt the need to reply on his behalf? Stay out of it. I actually found Ourdee's response more thoughtful and insightful by the way. As I have mentioned before, we should chat on the phone at the very least, I feel like we are mis-communicating on this board and I bet we could clear things up in a three minute conversation vs pounding out something over days on this board. PM me your number and I will give you a ring. | ||
| Hootowl |
" Like the founding fathers were omnipotent and the constitution is a perfect piece of prose, yet it has all these amendments attached to it" The constitution has, built in to it, a mechanism for changes. They're called amendments. The Founders had the wisdom to foresee that it may need to be updated from time to time. If you think the 2nd amendment is flawed, get it repealed. Until then, any talk of the infringement of that right will get you nowhere with a lot of people, myself included. Would you feel the same way if a comedian joked about taking the right to vote away from women and blacks? How about taking free speech away from the press, or limiting what topics they can write about? Or, really, any of the "you can't do this to me" restrictions that the Constitution places on government. Now, apply that outrage to the 2nd amendment and perhaps you'll see what a whole lot of folks are up in arms* about. *Forgive the pun. I used to think they were the lowest form of humor, but I've recently become enamored with them. In fact, I recently staged a theatrical production about puns. It was a play...on words. | ||
| Reindog |
Greatlaker, You are communicating quite well. You have threatened bodily harm to Sifo and now you want his phone number. Badweb will be held liable for your actions so knock off your BS. |
