dagblog - Comments for "An Armed Society Is a Bloody Society"

Nonsense and a straw-man to

Parabellum — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 22:44:28 +0000

In reply to An Armed Society Is a Bloody Society

Nonsense and a straw-man to boot. Clearly, the author has no idea what gun-owners think and is unqualified to speak for anyone. His premise is also provably flawed since we are more armed than ever and crime has been on a downtrend for 20+ years.

Stand you ground laws do not mean that you can shoot someone dead over manners. If the author is so stupid to actually believe such a thing, he should please try it. He would be convicted of murder in any court in the nation, but I suspect he knows that quite well.

YOU, Dear Reader, should be offended that the thinks so little of you, that he figures you just might believe it.

"the right of the people to

Resistance — Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:17:53 +0000

In reply to "no law respecting the

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

"no law respecting the establishment of religion..."

Someday, someone might say "Looking at the cost/benefit ratio vs Liberty, Moral decay is having an enormous effect on society, "our forefathers couldn't have possibly intended, for the societal ills to be ignored. Times have surely changed. from our forefathers days and for the common good, the lessons of Morality, that only the Church could teach, would go a long ways of not only ending gun violence but all violence" "By this one single step, we as a Nation who are in need of healing, would be respecting (the value of) the establishment of Religion"

It's a slippery slope to attack the Second Amendment. "What price the First"

Well said.

Peter Schwartz — Sun, 23 Feb 2014 02:42:54 +0000

In reply to Owning guns and lots of ammo

Well said.

"no law respecting the

jollyroger — Sun, 23 Feb 2014 00:13:03 +0000

In reply to Apparently it's not the

"no law respecting the establishment of religion..."

"No law means no law" Hugo Black, J.

Edit to add: Yes, I have a constitutional right to be free from religion.

Owning guns and lots of ammo

moat — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 23:22:03 +0000

In reply to Good food for thought, Moat I

Owning guns and lots of ammo will come in very handy if the war of all against all breaks out. You will probably last longer than me during the time of Trouble you often speak about because you are actively preparing for the event. Planning is the key element in any enterprise. My articles of faith forbid that sort of planning.

But to assert that the Second Amendment still serves as the same counterbalance to central authority as it did when it was drafted is a fantasy. You have often been challenged to explain how the ownership of firearms by individuals is supposed to withstand the force the military is capable of bringing to a fight. I cannot recall an instance where you have answered that challenge. Correct me if I am wrong.

Having a gun gives a person a leg up in a fight. Having an advantage gives one a sense of power. When it comes to war, the sensation of power is not a valid measure of relative strengths. Consider the Boxer Rebellion in China. The tradition of martial arts developed astounding abilities in each generation. It is easy to understand how this demonstration of power gave people confidence they could use this strength in battle. But those incredibly skilled martial artists were shot down by bullets like they were bottles on a fence.

War has always been about a lot more than the fight that takes place. Control of what can be made by whom, how people will eat, and who will help you when you are the weakest, are just as important as skill and valor demonstrated in the heat of battle. The people who drafted the Second Amendment had just gone through a crash course in those subjects. The communitarian emphasis in the language of the amendment was not an idealistic proposition about the balance of power in government but the call for a practical means of the production of war work that involved the population as a necessary condition for anything like war to happen. To not acknowledge how far we are from that arrangement is more disrespectful of the “intentions” of the Founders than attempts to stop guns being used by crazy people.

If it should come about that our government starts using the military to fight the population, the application of force would be the start of a Civil War. Nobody owns anybody, no matter how often they repeat the proposition. The “centrality” of our government will far apart pretty quickly when they send citizens to kill citizens.

In this truth, I do trust.

Never mind.

Ramona — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 22:21:38 +0000

In reply to Apparently it's not the

Never mind.

Apparently it's not the

Resistance — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 20:37:58 +0000

In reply to That's no answer. Read my

Apparently it's not the answer you wanted to hear?

What part of my response, didn't address or "answer" the main points of your comment?

(Highlighted words are mine)

Ramona: “I think the flaw in your argument is your belief that our current government ....

Resistance: “Just because there is no immediate danger, doesn't mean we ignore the possibility” .

Ramona Straw man: “By your code, there is nothing redeemable about the government we the people have elected, and they all must go”

Ramona: “You give no credit to any move toward fixes that have already been proven to help our citizens”.

Resistance: "What fixes the corruption and influence by powerful special interests?

As discussed prior in my reply to Moat.

Ramona Straw man or misrepresentation Ramona: “You talk about using violence--keeping the guns strapped on in case they come after you”……with no evidence that such a thing is likely to happen.

To include Ramona’s later comment “You might even have to open your eyes and look around.

No Ramona, it is you that needs to “open your eyes and look around.”

Resistance: As I pointed out earlier in my reply to Moat. Our learned forefathers had enough knowledge of history to have seen enough evidence that bad government does happen and the record is clear throughout all of history, but not only was it our forefathers who knew of it, in my reply to Moat,I gave a CURRENT example of Ukraine’s current government, usurping power from the people.

Ramona: “But most of us would rather work toward fixing what ails this country”.

How’s that working out? While this country continues its slide towards complete plutocratic rule and those in power serving their needs and not the people’s needs? Unless you want to say, Plutocrats are people too and they should come ahead of everyone else?

Fix it if you can but don’t disarm those who realize; it’s like catching the wind, a futile exercise.

Notice; Executive orders are now needed in this country to override our Constitution’s stated principles, of Separation of Powers. We were supposed to be free from the potential of tyranny by the executive.

Just as I suppose the folks in the Ukraine had WISHED

Ask the folks in the Ukraine if they thought their idea of free elections would give the current President the power to become a dictator.

Ramona: ”With all its faults, there is nothing so seriously wrong with our government that we're ready to arm ourselves and take to the streets.”

Resistance prior reply: “ Just because there is no immediate danger, doesn't mean we ignore the possibility. We don't let the gun control advocates; disarm this generation; so that future generations are left defenseless.”

A little more reflection, on what I wrote, instead of charging me with canned responses would go a long ways to open many eyes, to the realities

So again I ask; what part of my response, didn't address the main points of your comment and not straw man arguments or misrepresentations?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

As an aside: What if; A possibility? (or would you say their is no possibility)

Someday The Moral Majority comes into power; all three branches controlled by them and they decided arbitrarily, "the problem in America, is the peoples lack of moral values" and they decided to FORCE a religion down every ones throat? Using the same tactics, the gun control advocates employ?

Rephrased The Moral Majority in power saying "those who spread the idea of Freedom from Religion, have led this country on the course of moral decay"

Sound familiar to the Gun control advocates message, Guns have led this country down a bad road. Get the guns similar to Get the Heathens.

They would convince many It is the lack of moral values, that needs to to be addressed today and for future generations, because the Constitution really didn't mean, Freedom of from Religion.

That's no answer. Read my

Ramona — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:42:54 +0000

In reply to Just because there is no

That's no answer. Read my comment again. Ignore it if you choose, but at least make an attempt to answer honestly without using the same old canned comment you use no matter what the topic.

Just because there is no

Resistance — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 15:02:07 +0000

In reply to I think the flaw in your

Just because there is no immediate danger, doesn't mean we ignore the possibility.

We don't let the gun control advocates, disarm this generation; so that future generations are left defenseless.

Self protection is also a right for all generations of people to follow. A Inalienable right.

I think the flaw in your

Ramona — Sat, 22 Feb 2014 14:11:41 +0000

In reply to Good food for thought, Moat I

I think the flaw in your argument is your belief that our current government is one that needs constant resistance. By your code, there is nothing redeemable about the government we the people have elected, and they all must go. (No mention of who might be better to replace them.)

You give no credit to any move toward fixes that have already been proven to help our citizens. You refuse to back those efforts or even to acknowledge they exist.

You talk about using violence--keeping the guns strapped on in case they come after you--with no evidence that such a thing is likely to happen.

If your arguments against this government are salted only with "what if's" or "it could happen", and nothing happens, you might eventually have to come to terms with the problems with that logic. You might even have to open your eyes and look around.

There is much to complain about. I think we're all on board with that. But most of us would rather work toward fixing what ails this country than to fixate on ways to overthrow the government.

With all its faults, there is nothing so seriously wrong with our government that we're ready to arm ourselves and take to the streets.

Right?