Guns Guns Guns
Moderator: Moderators
Guns Guns Guns
Post #1So where does everyone stand on the "right to bear arms" issue? I'd like to hear the pros and cons. I'm kinda divided right now, between the ideal and the realistic positions.
Post #71
You have several non-lethal options.help3434 wrote: [Replying to post 62 by Dantalion]
How would you react if someone broke in while you were there? How will he react when he sees you there, not knowing how you will react? It could bet violent.
First off, you could do nothing, burglars are not psychotic murderers and rapists. No deaths.
You could also let your presence be known, turning on lights and making noise.
A large majority of criminals is going to flee right there. No deaths
You could also hold them at gunpoint and threaten to shoot if they don't get out.
No deaths.
Also note that the 'harder' you react to them, the more chance you have of getting hurt yourself.
But ofc, when you or somebody else really is in danger, when noise and light and threats don't help, I'm all for lethal self-defense.
But as a last resort, not an initial reaction, that's just insane.
It wouldn't be the first to accidentally shoot a family member while thinking it's a burglar.
- Nickman
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5443
- Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Idaho
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Guns Guns Guns
Post #72That is why is said "if we even possibly could." It makes you feel better to own one though. At least you could take a couple out before they get you.McCulloch wrote:Reality check. If it comes down to a fire fight between the forces of an armed citizenry and the forces available to the government, the citizens will lose. I certainly hope that we have gotten past the stage where we really think that we need arms in case we have to overthrow our government. Cuz its not gonna happen. Not even with AR-15s or M-16s.Nickman wrote: I am a progressive but I in no way condone taking away our weapons. Like I said, we need them to overthrow government if need be or if we even possibly could.
Re: Guns Guns Guns
Post #73Practically speaking, people need arms to defend themselves. Police, more often than not, show up to the scene of a crime only to count the dead. In the event the federal government started waging mass democide in the conventional sense, small arms would be preferable to bricks, rocks, and Molotov cocktails, but a revolution would be no contest. Self defense and attrition would be the only things that could save the victims in the long run; some means of self defense would be better than nothing, else it would be like lambs to the slaughter.Nickman wrote:Like I said, we need them to overthrow government if need be or if we even possibly could.
Yet the idea of overthrowing the government is unthinkable at this point, even if anyone would want to. And to what end? To set up yet another government? That's just resetting the clock... all that bloodshed for a future tyranny (even if you do think the ends justify the violent means)? No thanks.
And the US is already tyrannical. The revolutionaries got themselves killed for paying far less taxes than we do today, all because they thought having a "representative" made an ounce of difference. This state has the power to monitor everything and the self appointed legal authority to detain you, hold you for questioning, or assassinate you. And no one in heaven or earth can stop that. Too many people have too many incentives to keep the government around. Too many people care more about American Idol, or the possibility that Facebook aps are taking their information after they agreed to the terms and conditions. Most people don't really care about PRISM or drone strikes or wars. They care about everything else that doesn't matter.
Will things get better? Only if people raise their kids right and treat each other right. If you're going to vote, you might as well pray to Thor while you're at it.
-
- Apprentice
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:16 pm
Re: Guns Guns Guns
Post #74I am totally against it.Beto wrote: So where does everyone stand on the "right to bear arms" issue? I'd like to hear the pros and cons. I'm kinda divided right now, between the ideal and the realistic positions.
Matthew 26:52-54 "Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword" I can say in today's comparison it would surely be guns. The stats on death toll should point out another reason why.
"right to bear arms" won't work in some of the pacific Islands or in a much smaller nation. Every country has their own laws of what they're protecting. I guess the bigger the Nation the more surveillance it needs.
Daniel 9:26 "The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed."
Guns should only be used for War...only if the purpose serves to bring true PEACE! Now I'm not saying to go get a gun and bring peace in your living room when a thief is trying to climb through your window?? The consequences are a lot higher when a HUMAN LIFE is dead. I won't debate you on knives, and other weapons in different situations and use it as an excuse to have a gun to stop the villain. What happen to good old fist fights one on one these days?? And Maybe one day become a good MMA/UFC fighter lol. Yes..I know..turn your other cheek right. Our Faith is always going to be tested even if I have to defend myself one day or the lord tells to me "RUN!" I won't know until happens.
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Guns Guns Guns
Post #75acehighinfinity wrote:I am totally against it.Beto wrote: So where does everyone stand on the "right to bear arms" issue? I'd like to hear the pros and cons. I'm kinda divided right now, between the ideal and the realistic positions.
Matthew 26:52-54 "Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword" I can say in today's comparison it would surely be guns. The stats on death toll should point out another reason why.
"right to bear arms" won't work in some of the pacific Islands or in a much smaller nation. Every country has their own laws of what they're protecting. I guess the bigger the Nation the more surveillance it needs.
Daniel 9:26 "The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed."
Guns should only be used for War...only if the purpose serves to bring true PEACE! Now I'm not saying to go get a gun and bring peace in your living room when a thief is trying to climb through your window?? The consequences are a lot higher when a HUMAN LIFE is dead. I won't debate you on knives, and other weapons in different situations and use it as an excuse to have a gun to stop the villain. What happen to good old fist fights one on one these days?? And Maybe one day become a good MMA/UFC fighter lol. Yes..I know..turn your other cheek right. Our Faith is always going to be tested even if I have to defend myself one day or the lord tells to me "RUN!" I won't know until happens.
HUm..
War for peace. Sounds like a start of a George Carlin quote.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
-
- Apprentice
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:16 pm
Re: Guns Guns Guns
Post #76George Carlin? I've never heard of him. I wasn't highlighting War with great concern? I was referring to Guns are better off used in the War i.e World War 1 and 2, etc. I thought the War served a purpose in trying to restore order and peace? If not, then thanks for the correction.Goat wrote:acehighinfinity wrote:I am totally against it.Beto wrote: So where does everyone stand on the "right to bear arms" issue? I'd like to hear the pros and cons. I'm kinda divided right now, between the ideal and the realistic positions.
Matthew 26:52-54 "Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword" I can say in today's comparison it would surely be guns. The stats on death toll should point out another reason why.
"right to bear arms" won't work in some of the pacific Islands or in a much smaller nation. Every country has their own laws of what they're protecting. I guess the bigger the Nation the more surveillance it needs.
Daniel 9:26 "The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed."
Guns should only be used for War...only if the purpose serves to bring true PEACE! Now I'm not saying to go get a gun and bring peace in your living room when a thief is trying to climb through your window?? The consequences are a lot higher when a HUMAN LIFE is dead. I won't debate you on knives, and other weapons in different situations and use it as an excuse to have a gun to stop the villain. What happen to good old fist fights one on one these days?? And Maybe one day become a good MMA/UFC fighter lol. Yes..I know..turn your other cheek right. Our Faith is always going to be tested even if I have to defend myself one day or the lord tells to me "RUN!" I won't know until happens.
HUm..
War for peace. Sounds like a start of a George Carlin quote.
Anyway, my real reason is Guns are not safe on the streets and suburbs especially in the hands Gang-bangers! If a Nation is unable to cease smugglers/importation of Weapons on a larger scale...then better off not legalizing Guns in the first place. Maybe guns are amused for duck hunting or shooting cans (and other amusements)...Of course I wouldn't want to upset all you Gun lovers lol.
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Guns Guns Guns
Post #77acehighinfinity wrote:George Carlin? I've never heard of him. I wasn't highlighting War with great concern? I was referring to Guns are better off used in the War i.e World War 1 and 2, etc. I thought the War served a purpose in trying to restore order and peace? If not, then thanks for the correction.Goat wrote:acehighinfinity wrote:I am totally against it.Beto wrote: So where does everyone stand on the "right to bear arms" issue? I'd like to hear the pros and cons. I'm kinda divided right now, between the ideal and the realistic positions.
Matthew 26:52-54 "Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword" I can say in today's comparison it would surely be guns. The stats on death toll should point out another reason why.
"right to bear arms" won't work in some of the pacific Islands or in a much smaller nation. Every country has their own laws of what they're protecting. I guess the bigger the Nation the more surveillance it needs.
Daniel 9:26 "The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed."
Guns should only be used for War...only if the purpose serves to bring true PEACE! Now I'm not saying to go get a gun and bring peace in your living room when a thief is trying to climb through your window?? The consequences are a lot higher when a HUMAN LIFE is dead. I won't debate you on knives, and other weapons in different situations and use it as an excuse to have a gun to stop the villain. What happen to good old fist fights one on one these days?? And Maybe one day become a good MMA/UFC fighter lol. Yes..I know..turn your other cheek right. Our Faith is always going to be tested even if I have to defend myself one day or the lord tells to me "RUN!" I won't know until happens.
HUm..
War for peace. Sounds like a start of a George Carlin quote.
Anyway, my real reason is Guns are not safe on the streets and suburbs especially in the hands Gang-bangers! If a Nation is unable to cease smugglers/importation of Weapons on a larger scale...then better off not legalizing Guns in the first place. Maybe guns are amused for duck hunting or shooting cans (and other amusements)...Of course I wouldn't want to upset all you Gun lovers lol.
He was (now deceased) comedian that was very politically aware.
The quote was 'War for peace is like screwing for virginity'
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
-
- Apprentice
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:16 pm
Post #79
[Replying to Dantalion]
Touchy and you're breaking my heart...but yeah haven't heard of him until now. If it is the same George Carlin on wikipedia; an American comedian, actor, etc. WOW! Didn't know he was important....my condolences
. I've heard of Chris Rock does that help
or are you still disappointed?
Touchy and you're breaking my heart...but yeah haven't heard of him until now. If it is the same George Carlin on wikipedia; an American comedian, actor, etc. WOW! Didn't know he was important....my condolences


- Nickman
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5443
- Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Idaho
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #80
Here you go. Mind you there is language.acehighinfinity wrote: [Replying to Dantalion]
Touchy and you're breaking my heart...but yeah haven't heard of him until now. If it is the same George Carlin on wikipedia; an American comedian, actor, etc. WOW! Didn't know he was important....my condolences. I've heard of Chris Rock does that help
or are you still disappointed?
[youtube][/youtube]