Gun Control ?

[RavenHawk]

10 hours ago, Kismit said:

If only you knew how hilarious this is to someone living outside of America.

I contrasted the concepts of Freedom in America compared to that of the rest of the world.  I would fully expect our concept to be completely alien to the rest of the world.  That’s what I find hilarious.

 

Australia would not be over run by tyranny because it's full of Australian's, (some are hiding in the government, shhh!)

It wouldn’t?  What do you call a bunch of unarmed Australians?  Cannon fodder. 

 

The people in power actually care about the country and it's people, same thing in the States.

Some, not all.  Some start out caring but end up corrupt.  Others just start off corrupt.  This is the reason we have a 2^nd Amendment.  It’s called human nature.

 

Don't believe it?

Not one bit, until they prove it.

 

Get involved in local politics.

As if it was that easy.  I would have to put up with the shenanigans foisted on newbies.  I don’t have the temperament for that.  I’ve also study character and leadership for a very long time.  I just don’t have the qualities needed to be a good leader.  I’d also have to put up with all those accusations of lurid affairs.  I wish my life was that exciting, but I haven’t had a one.  I’ve never inappropriately touched a woman or harassed one, but the minute I’d become a politician, they’d be popping out of the woodwork to accuse me.  Old tricks are still good tricks.  I’d rather keep my gun to shoot the politician than play their games.

 

The only way the Australian or New Zealand people would ever be at risk of tyranny, is if somebody convinced the army to take out Parliament. 

I think I’ve already shown how that would work.  First you’d slowly weaponize government agencies against the people.  Replace loyal military leaders with those less capable and would obey the PM’s orders without question.  You’d institute pro-ideological civilian groups to do your bidding in the streets and make them as powerful as the military.  Then you’d institute a national healthcare system where you can control the population.  But that would never happen anywhere – right?

 

That's a huge call. Likelyhood, zero, because the power balance is currently effective and working.

Globalization is very effective and working, but so is its opposition.

 

If it ever sways in too heavily in favour of government, you can bet the people and the army will make forcible changes to governing. Why? Because they're Australian.

Setton is saying that the civilian population doesn’t win wars so that leaves out the cannon fodder.  That way the military would be used sparingly only in cases where the revolt is small and can be made to look like anti-nationals.  The government will keep the issue confused.  The military won’t have a clue.

[Kismit]

36 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

First you’d slowly weaponize government agencies against the people.

How? Which agencies? Detail for me please how one person or even a group of say six influential people achieve this in New Zealand, or Australia.

Quote

What do you call a bunch of unarmed Australians? Cannon fodder.

At best this is propaganda, at worst it is a very bad joke. But one thing it is not, is evidence of your claim.

Quote

That way the military would be used sparingly only in cases where the revolt is small and can be made to look like anti-nationals.  The government will keep the issue confused.  The military won’t have a clue.

Is it an uprising of the people or a crushing of the masses by the Government you are discribing?

How exactly ( detailed ), do you see this Government crush take place?

Or indeed an organised co-ordinated uprising of the people?

The south Pacific has seen it's fair share of government take downs over the years. Fiji and Frank Binamarama would be an obvious example.

New Zealands political stability is actually more at risk from armed civilians who want to take down the government. Thankfully they don't have access to the numbers necisary for a disciplined, organised army big enough.

I much prefer a government I have a say over than a well armed malitia who might think they have a right to speak for me.

 

[Essan]

Here in Britain we tried this idea of a public militia taking over once.   Seemed a great idea at the time.  Then they banned Christmas and made women dress head to foot in black and stay indoors .....   And burned anyone who disagreed with them.  We soon went back to a monarchy! 

Never again. 

However bad your elected government is, every other possible option is much worse.....

Edited February 24, 2018 by Essan

[Farmer77]

7 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

This another who the hell are you and what have to done to my friend moment. You'd really disarm law abiding citizens? What kind of libertarian are you?  

Nah man I'm just willing and able to laugh at myself at times. I thought the meme conjured funny imagery

I will say I am coming around to the idea of altering the application of the second amendment though. For me the 2nd is about combating tyranny not home protection so I believe we should establish a local militia system  - completely separate from the federal government - where citizens must join and drill in order own weapons beyond bolt action rifles, shotguns and pistols.

Its the kind of concept which would fundamentally change the structure of our society just by the sheer amount of effort which would be involved to make such a thing happen but I truly believe we will lose the 2nd all together within the next 20 years or so if we don't find a way to fix the problems we're having. 

[Farmer77]

I think I like the idea BUT after the way this administration went after the J20 folks it brings me right back to a paranoid state. 

 

Trump Said to Weigh 'Red Flag' Orders to Take Guns Away Quickly

 

Quote

The White House is considering the idea of using restraining orders to take firearms away from people considered dangerous as part of its response to last week’s massacre at a Florida high school, two people familiar with the matter said.

Under extreme risk protection orders, which are also known as red flag laws or gun violence restraining orders, firearms can be confiscated from people found to be at risk. 

 

[Paranormal Panther]

14 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Wow. You really do think the world is America.

That's funny. Some of our members here think that America is Europe.

[Vorg]

This shooter was 19 and legally entitled to the guns he had. Perhaps raising the age to buy weapons to 20 or 21 would at least stop High School aged kids from going out and buying weapons for a rampage.

Edited February 25, 2018 by South Alabam

[+DieChecker]

5 hours ago, Setton said:

These are revolutions against a foreign occupying or colonial  power, not a country's own government. 

For revolts against a government (remember I was talking about specifically British history) we can look at examples both with professional soldiers on both sides or only the government side. 

In every case, a popular revolt without military support fails (usually miserably). A revolt with professional soldiers supporting succeeds more often than not. 

This has been true from the barons revolt in the 13th century to Irish civil war. 

We also see through all this that the military will not support a tyrannical government. They have proved their loyalty to the people over the government again and again. 

I ask again, do you think your military is any less loyal to its people than the British? 

What is a revolution, except a successful civil war? You are parsing words here.

You are talking professional soldiers on both sides? Not the situation under discussion. Guns are there for revolt... revolution... if the FedGov becomes tyrannical. Not so we can form up into lines and march across a field shooting at each other.

True, the military does usually side with the populous. An excellent point that most anti-gun people will poo-poo. I don't think that the US military is disloyal to the public. But it has happened in the past where nations fell because they handed there physical defense to a third party. 

Like was said... drones could be a big part of suppression of rebellion. Drones that (at least in part) are already run by AI. An army of robots can be essentially controlled by a tiny minority and have zero loyalty to any except those who send them a signal.

[+DieChecker]

3 hours ago, Essan said:

Here in Britain we tried this idea of a public militia taking over once.   Seemed a great idea at the time.  Then they banned Christmas and made women dress head to foot in black and stay indoors .....   And burned anyone who disagreed with them.  We soon went back to a monarchy! 

Never again. 

However bad your elected government is, every other possible option is much worse.....

But, was there a change in leadership? Or did they put the same monarchs back in charge?

Didn't the English Civil War lead directly to the curtailing of the monarchs absolute control, which led directly to the system that the UK uses today? Without that civil war would England be the England of today (Where the monarchs are basically honorary), or more like Syria, with an absolute dictatorial monarch?

Seems to me that Reform happened that needed to happen.

[Vorg]

16 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

Still hearing nothing but, but, but, but. Still at the denial stage eh? Here's one for you. If you agree that the children are our future, and that our very survival as a species depends on them, why would you think guns are more important? Your answers also indicate that freedom is more important than the kids. You are slaves to fear, doesn't sound like freedom to me.

Hank

Tell that to the 1,386,734 victims of execution in Cambodia from 75-79. Had they had guns they might be alive and have grandchildren now. But they are dead.

Not to mention other ethnic "cleansing" were 10's of millions have died from a lack of being able to defend themselves in many countries. Many are recent and continue to this day.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_cleansing_campaigns

Until this world is entirely at peace, I will keep my weapons to ensure there are children in the future.

 

 

 

[Aquila King]

1 hour ago, Paranormal Panther said:

That's funny. Some of our members here think that America is Europe.

I wish that were the case, but no...

[GlitterRose]

5 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

What future do the living children have if their Rights are not intact?

 

Again, what about the vast majority that dies from all other causes?  You just ignore them?

 

At times like this, one needs to think logically and not emotionally, and you aren’t even thinking emotionally.  Maybe stupidly (to coin a phrase).

 

Whataboutism.

Dead children have no rights.

Your right to own something cool that goes bang a lot and really fast does not supersede their right to go to school and not be shot dead. 

[Farmer77]

10 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

You make it sound like losing morality in this country over the last 30 years was a good thing. You just described the old saying 'good times create weak men, weak men create hard times, hard times create strong men'

We haven't lost morality. We're evolving way from the lunacy of religion , religion is not morality. 

 

[Aquila King]

If your child hits another child with a stick, do you:

1. Give everybody sticks
2. Give certain kids sticks who are adept with sticks to defend everybody else
3. Take away the stick

Seriously people, this isn't rocket science.

[Aquila King]

2 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

Whataboutism.

Dead children have no rights.

Your right to own something cool that goes bang a lot and really fast does not supersede their right to go to school and not be shot dead. 

They want to talk about gun rights all while ignoring the right to life.

Funny how they tend to also call themselves 'pro-lifers' when it comes to controlling women's reproductive rights, but once you're out of the womb they're fine with people shooting each other all to hell in the streets or off in some senseless wars. I don't see how in the world you can be pro-life and be pro-gun. It's preposterous.

[Farmer77]

Just now, Aquila King said:

They want to talk about gun rights all while ignoring the right to life.

As someone posted earlier in the thread I think there is a decent argument to be made that maintaining an armed populace actually ensures the right to life. Cambodia being the most convenient example of what happens to an unarmed populace when its leaders turn. 

Noone from either side seems to like my idea of recommitting to a local militia system but I just don't see how Americans can keep the second Amendment without some serious change. 

Clearly we have a serious problem:

Already 5 Potential Parkland Shooter Copycats' Weapons Caches Have Been Seized Since the Shooting

Quote

• A Whittier, California, school resource deputy heard a 17-year-old student say that “the school will be shot up in three weeks.” When sheriffs raided the teen’s home, they found 90 high-capacity magazines, two handguns, and two semiautomatic AR-15s.
• An 18-year-old Clarksburg, Maryland, high school student brought a knife and a loaded 9mm handgun to school. When police raided his home, they found an AR-15, several other weapons, along with a list he’d made of his issues with school.
• During an investigation into a 17-year-old student’s threats to shoot up a Manistee County, Michigan, high school, sheriffs found an AR-15 in the young man’s home.
• After an 18-year-old former student made threats against a Fair Haven, Vermont, high school, police discovered that he had purchased a shotgun and ammunition, and had been recently released from a Maine mental health facility.
• Riverdale County, Nevada, sheriffs arrested a 27-year-old man who had threatened to kill students at Norco College. They located one loaded AR-15; two handguns, also loaded; and 510 rounds of ammunition.

 

[Aquila King]

2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

As someone posted earlier in the thread I think there is a decent argument to be made that maintaining an armed populace actually ensures the right to life. Cambodia being the most convenient example of what happens to an unarmed populace when its leaders turn. 

Noone from either side seems to like my idea of recommitting to a local militia system but I just don't see how Americans can keep the second Amendment without some serious change. 

Clearly we have a serious problem:

Already 5 Potential Parkland Shooter Copycats' Weapons Caches Have Been Seized Since the Shooting

I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-innocent people being killed in mass shootings. Therefore I'd be perfectly open to any idea that prevents such tragedies. If more guns were the solution then I'd be all for it, but it isn't. All of the statistics overwhelmingly prove that more guns = more gun violence, that's just a fact.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts

I haven't heard this idea of yours even floated out there yet, so I'll certainly do my research on it a bit before coming to any conclusions. However as to whether or not our current gun laws are viable, or should even be less restrictive, the answer is a clear and resounding hell no.

[RavenHawk]

14 hours ago, Setton said:

Again, all through history we see that an armed civilian population doesn't win civil wars.

Off the top of my head, the US Revolutionary War (1776), French Revolution (1789), and Russian Revolution (1917) comes to mind.

 

We don't need to be armed because we know our army will be more loyal to friends and family than the government. 

Eventually, that would be the case.  So the government would have to try to use the military in a decisive blow in the initial engagement.  If not then try to segregate and eliminate those that would be loyal to the populace or raise enough auxiliaries from the civilian population that is loyal to the Administration.

[RavenHawk]

11 hours ago, DieChecker said:

We remove religion from schools... Hand the education system to the Liberals... AND when education and the school system fails... It is the Republicans and Guns that are to blame.

Right out of the Progressive playbook.

[Likely Guy]

1 hour ago, Aquila King said:

If your child hits another child with a stick, do you:

1. Give everybody sticks
2. Give certain kids sticks who are adept with sticks to defend everybody else
3. Take away the stick

Seriously people, this isn't rocket science.

None of the above.

1) That's just dumb.

2) They come with bigger sticks. That's asinine.

3) That just ain't gonna happen.

It is about 'sticks' and stones, they do break bones... the time is now to meet in the middle.

All in all, you can't deinvent the stick, no more than you can a gun.

[RavenHawk]

8 hours ago, Kismit said:

How? Which agencies? Detail for me please how one person or even a group of say six influential people achieve this in New Zealand, or Australia.

It can be different in any given situation, but DHS, IRS, EPA, FBI, DOJ, and DHHS.  At least what we know now.  Here it has failed for now.  I would imagine that it would be similar in OZ and Kiwi.  If it wasn’t that easy, then there wouldn’t be any dictatorships in the world at all, but there are.  Perhaps many more fail than succeed, but enough that end up costing millions of lives.

 

At best this is propaganda, at worst it is a very bad joke. But one thing it is not, is evidence of your claim.

Well yes and no.  It was a bad joke in order to make the point and it is proof of my claim.  It is an axiom of the unarmed.

 

Is it an uprising of the people or a crushing of the masses by the Government you are discribing?

Both.  It is an uprising of the people for acts of tyranny by the government.  It’s a cat-n-mouse game.  Who’s going to blink first?  The government has to play it close to the vest.  If it is too overt, then the uprising will grow.  They can’t afford a massacre but that is usually what happens and at that point, it is lost.

 

How exactly ( detailed ), do you see this Government crush take place?

I’ve already laid that out in the post you replied to, in part and what I have already added in this reply.

 

Or indeed an organised co-ordinated uprising of the people?

Again, this isn’t something happening in a vacuum.  Something is driving it.  And what that is, is the tyranny of the government, as all government in time becomes tyrannical.  Our Founding Fathers made it our Right and our duty to correct that usurpation of our freedoms by the government.  They gave us two means to make corrections, either by the ballot or by the bullet.  Luckily or by the grace of GOD, the ballot won this time.

 

The south Pacific has seen it's fair share of government take downs over the years. Fiji and Frank Binamarama would be an obvious example.

As I’ve brought up a few posts ago, Colonial America, France, and Russia are probably the best known.

 

New Zealands political stability is actually more at risk from armed civilians who want to take down the government. Thankfully they don't have access to the numbers necisary for a disciplined, organised army big enough.

We’re not talking about armed civilians that want to take down the government for “light and transient causes” but as a duty to remove a government that has become tyrannical.

 

I much prefer a government I have a say over than a well armed malitia who might think they have a right to speak for me.

Well, that’s the point.  When you no longer have a say over the government, then you just might want the well armed militia to speak for you.  That’s why we have the 2^nd in the first place.

[Farmer77]

Haha is Trump just living out his movie dreams? ‘Back to the Future’ Writer Confirms Donald Trump Was Inspiration for Biff Tannen

 

 

[Farmer77]

Speaking of arming people in schools: 

 

Philando Castile Was a Role Model to Hundreds of Kids, Colleagues Say

 

Quote

Colleagues and parents on Thursday remembered Philando Castile as an ambitious man who served as a role model for hundreds of children before he was fatally shot by a police officer during a traffic stop in Minnesota.

Castile, who was known by friends as Phil, was a cafeteria supervisor at J.J. Hill Montessori Magnet School in Saint Paul, Minn., where he memorized the names of the 500 children he served every day — along with their food allergies, his former coworker said.

“He remembered their names. He remembered who couldn’t have milk. He knew what they could have to eat and what they couldn’t,” Joan Edman, a recently retired paraprofessional at the school, told TIME. “This was a real guy. He made a real contribution. Yes, black lives matter. But this man mattered.”

 

[RavenHawk]

14 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Speaking of arming people in schools: 

 

Philando Castile Was a Role Model to Hundreds of Kids, Colleagues Say

 

 

So you now want to disarm the police?

[Rlyeh]

10 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

That’s not what he is saying.  But the US is the world leader and that affects everything.  There’s one observation I’ve noticed from watching the Olympics over the past few years.  In the Olympics of the 60s and 70s, the athlete’s character and physical attributes of each country where stereotypical for that country.  Today, most athletes have some connection to the United States.  Some train here.  Some live here (go to college).  Some are Americans (natural born or naturalized) that have hereditary ties with some other nation.  Some have American coaches.  Today, they all look American.  They speak their own language but their mannerisms are American.  I have pride in my athletes but I can also share the pride that others have for their athletes.  Most of these athletes build relationships with each other because they have competed against each other so many times.  They are friends and rivals as opposed to just rivals.

 

What is this crap? He's saying Australia and the UK doesn't abuse their citizens because America.