Do we NEED guns? (evolution, America, pagan, Zen)

[Fascist Christ]

Originally Posted by robtex

guns make is easy to kill people
many guns are designed specifcally for killing people

And nuclear weapons are used to lay waste to entire cities, or countries, in a single blow. Do we use them? No. Why do we have them? So that we don't have to use them.

The same goes for guns.

As for why people kill other people, that can be an entire thread on it's own.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Darkdale

Weapons of all kinds are essential to any free citizenry, simply for protection against enemy forces and against domestic government. As it is right now, if America was ever invaded, there is no way that a foreign army could take the south, or New York City or LA. Besides our Military and National Guards, the citizens are armed and would be able to fight. Weapons do far more good than they do ill and once the right to arms is given up, it never will return again. Like many Americans, I would willing go to war to protect the right to bare arms, for without that right, none of the other rights are secure.

What enemy forces? Do you realize that the USA has by far, the most powerful miltary in the world today. Trust me when I tell you that invasion from a hostile goverement is terribly unlikely. Too unlikely than the for it to be used as a reason to allow for handguns and assult rifles.

There is no domestic threat. We can vote here and as a bonus you don't have to defect from the USA to leave. Just board a plane or drive an auto and you are free to go. Again no armed revolution neccessary.

What good comes from owning handguns and assult rifles ? Is there any other reason than fighting off invading armies and preparing for an armed conflict with US servicemen that you can think of? I ask because if those are your only 2 reasons than you are making a stronger arguement for gun control than against.

Tim McVeigh and the michigan militia think like that. By allowing them to have these firearms you are condoning their actions by making them legal and opportunistic to commit crimes by "fighting a revolution against the USA."

The fact that you call them "weapons" make your justification based on violence which you propose to counter with more violence and to hold in check the police and miltary should they attempt violence. It is really a distrubing proposition.

[Darkdale]

Originally Posted by robtex

What if you went to the police supply store and bought some pepper spray instead?

Why don't you make decisions for yourself and leave the rest of us alone? This is a matter of personal freedom. I don't think people really have a problem with guns anyway, I think they just dislike people who like guns... either that, or it stems from pacifist philosophies, which should not be forced on others. I just love have some people are willing to use the guns and force of the government to strip the people of their guns. It's hypocrisy. If the government has guns, then the people should have them too. All gun control does is weaken the people and give more power to government. Of course, the more government we have, the weaker and more dependant the people will become... but that is an entirely different matter.

All I know, is that total gun control in America will never work, because it will mean civil war. Plain and simple. If you want our guns, you'll have to get your own and come and kill us.

[Fascist Christ]

Originally Posted by robtex

I am glad you are one who does not see armed conflict with the US goverement as a viable option. However, if you feel that poverty is a leading cause of crime, which I would concur with, couldnt' that 100 billion dollar a year price tag for gun related incidents go a long way in clearing up poverty? Even if only 1/5 of it was used for poverty it could go along way.

That is absurd. They may spend 100 billion opposing violence, but they spend much more than that promoting it in foreign countries. Violent governments beget violent citizens.

Originally Posted by robtex

To further complictate it guns are the cause of much of the violence in the USA. This is because anyone can be lethal with a gun and the emotional commitment needed to kill with a firearm is quite a bit lower than say with a blunt instrument or a sharp instrument. What your arguement is essentially saying is that we live in a violent world so we need MORE violent instruments to quell this situation.

No. No. No. I didn't want to get into this here, but I guess I must. If the government kills people, it is no surprise that their people will do the same. When the majority glorify the execution of Jesus the Nazarene as some kind of redemption, it is no surprise that we are desensitized to violence. When we say that it is okay for kids to watch a cartoon like Pokemon where they train animals to fight each other, but raise a fuss over some black chick's boob, we are sending the wrong message to our children. When women whore themselves out to pay the rent and people turn to black market trading to put food on the table, it is no surprise when violence occurs.

If you believe that guns cause violence, then I fear you have lost your faith in humanity.

Originally Posted by robtex

What if you went to the police supply store and bought some pepper spray instead?

It's hard enough to stop an armored soldier with a handgun.

[Fascist Christ]

Originally Posted by robtex

There is no domestic threat. We can vote here and as a bonus you don't have to defect from the USA to leave. Just board a plane or drive an auto and you are free to go. Again no armed revolution neccessary.

Not yet. It it wll be if and when the guns are pointed at us first. The founding fathers new that tyranny, even in a democracy, is still tyranny. Most people in this country now foolishly think that democracy is somehow immune to tyranny.

Running away is not the answer. Government must serve the people, not the other way around.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Darkdale

Why don't you make decisions for yourself and leave the rest of us alone? This is a matter of personal freedom. I don't think people really have a problem with guns anyway, I think they just dislike people who like guns... either that, or it stems from pacifist philosophies, which should not be forced on others. I just love have some people are willing to use the guns and force of the government to strip the people of their guns. It's hypocrisy. If the government has guns, then the people should have them too. All gun control does is weaken the people and give more power to government. Of course, the more government we have, the weaker and more dependant the people will become... but that is an entirely different matter.

All I know, is that total gun control in America will never work, because it will mean civil war. Plain and simple. If you want our guns, you'll have to get your own and come and kill us.

You live in a society. Gun control is not a "self-issue" it is a society issue. Furthermore, handguns and assult rifle's primary person is again, killing people. I don't know who you are speculating on as to why some people are pro-gun control but for me, I see the risks outweighting the rewards. A numbers game coupled with the reality that the primary purpose of handguns and assult rifles is murder.

As far as a total gun control ban I am not an advocate of that either. Just handguns and assult rifles or any other miltary firearm. I do see the need for shotguns (that are not sawed off) and deer hunting rifles.

On a tangent why if you fear the goverment do you still live here? Isn't relocation a saner option than armed revolution in this case?

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Fascist Christ

That is absurd. They may spend 100 billion opposing violence, but they spend much more than that promoting it in foreign countries. Violent governments beget violent citizens.

No. No. No. I didn't want to get into this here, but I guess I must. If the government kills people, it is no surprise that their people will do the same. When the majority glorify the execution of Jesus the Nazarene as some kind of redemption, it is no surprise that we are desensitized to violence. When we say that it is okay for kids to watch a cartoon like Pokemon where they train animals to fight each other, but raise a fuss over some black chick's boob, we are sending the wrong message to our children. When women whore themselves out to pay the rent and people turn to black market trading to put food on the table, it is no surprise when violence occurs.

If you believe that guns cause violence, then I fear you have lost your faith in humanity.

It's hard enough to stop an armored soldier with a handgun.

If I am understanding your assement of the 100 billion you are suggesting the cost is nominal based on your flippant comparision of it to foreign relations policy. While the figures are quantifable I suppose the interpretation is subjective and as such I would say they are far beyond nominal in my personal assessment.

I have no idea what you are trying to establish by the no no no paragraph. Hence my lack of reply to it.

Guns make violence more easy to attain and situationally more feasible by the ease of operation of them. Handguns and assult rifles primary purpose is murder. That is a reality and the notion of "if you believe guns cause violence than you have lost your faith in humanity" is a red herring to the topic of debate as well as a meaningless statement on the issue of gun control.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Fascist Christ

Not yet. It it wll be if and when the guns are pointed at us first. The founding fathers new that tyranny, even in a democracy, is still tyranny. Most people in this country now foolishly think that democracy is somehow immune to tyranny.

Running away is not the answer. Government must serve the people, not the other way around.

Could you please define "us" and "them".

Your macho attitude, in reference to "running away is not the answer" is a stronger arguement for gun control to me than against. In reference to "goverment must serve the people not other way around" I don't see how gun control laws will aid or deter the relationship society has with the deocratic goverment other than on issues of the gun control laws themselves. By stating we, as in society, need guns to get service from the govement you are advocating armed revolution. If I might make an alternate suggestion. I would go with voting and campaigning in our democratic republic instead.

[Fascist Christ]

Originally Posted by robtex

If I am understanding your assement of the 100 billion you are suggesting the cost is nominal based on your flippant comparision of it to foreign relations policy. While the figures are quantifable I suppose the interpretation is subjective and as such I would say they are far beyond nominal in my personal assessment.

I have no idea what you are trying to establish by the no no no paragraph. Hence my lack of reply to it.

Guns make violence more easy to attain and situationally more feasible by the ease of operation of them. Handguns and assult rifles primary purpose is murder. That is a reality and the notion of "if you believe guns cause violence than you have lost your faith in humanity" is a red herring to the topic of debate as well as a meaningless statement on the issue of gun control.

You stated that the ease of gun use encourages violence, and I said that it does not. I am only saying that there are environmental factors that you fail to consider. I believe that people can own guns and live peacefully together, hence my opposition to gun control.

Each of the environmental factors that I have stated could warrant their own thread for debate, hence my hesitation. I am sorry if you cannot see the connection.