The 2nd Amendment

Indie

OK you give examples of bad things happening that instil fear (1-2-3) you then give your solution - a gun stopped such harm coming to you (so guns are a solution to these problems).

But what jumped out at me was this - The high crime area I was working in at the time was also where drugs were bought and sold, and I would conclude that those who lacked the money to purchase the drugs looked for someone to provide them with the means.

So the big problem is dysfunctional drugs policies, having a gun is not going to tackle the underlying causes of the problems, the desire for a gun because someone fears harm is a symptom not a solution. Only tackling the social, economic and political problems will the solution truly be found.

So wouldn’t it be better to have more effective drugs policies that tackled the underlying problems then the crime that people associate it with would lessen and people might not feel the fear that fuels their desire for a gun to protect them from harm.

 

Sig

Ok so you are basically saying that you think armed citizens are the final arbiters, the ones that would defend American liberty and uphold the US constitution against tyranny?

When would you/they act?

What for you would be the trigger?

Also I’ve asked you before - in such eventuality what do you think your/their guns are going to accomplish and how?

 

By being equally well organized and, in so far as possible, as well armed. That is why, I believe, citizens need to continue to have access to semi-automatic rifles, standard capacity magazines, and automatic weapons.

I completely agree that political avenues must be used first and foremost, and that violence must be an absolute last resort. That said, we have seen countless times throughout history that sometimes politics fails. Humans, after all, are not perfect. Because of that, violence and the tools to carry out that violence must remain on the table.

 

Meagain


My own sentiments

 

Sig

When would you/they act?

What for you would be the trigger?

Also I’ve asked you before - in such eventuality what do you think your/their guns are going to accomplish and how?

But are your right wing ideas the best way to accomplish what is best for your society? I mean -

How would you arrange healthcare cover in your country?

How do you know (as you have indicated) that people on assistance are their out of their own making and how would you help them?

Why do you think most people in hardship are there because they are lazy scroungers?

 

1. You're the one who brought up Laos.

2. So you admit there are many reasons people own guns?

3. I think it should be quite obvious that I'm not 'listening' to your written words, but you've written nothing I find relevant to the 2nd amendment, which as you are a British citizen has no application to you.

4. I fear being bitten by a poisonous snake even when I carry a gun, but it's not something I dwell on.

5. Protection from what ever danger one finds one self in that might be reduced or eliminated by having a gun.

6. The 2nd amendment doesn't prevent that.

 

Indie

Isn’t it where you live?

I have not said differently – again you need to read my posts.

Wouldn’t it be better to live in a society were people were not so afraid that they felt like they needed a gun for protection?

What I’m saying is that while guns may go some way to alleviate ones fear it is unlikely to tackle its underlying cause.

 

1. Where I live is irrelevant to the topic.

2. But you do continue inserting a reference to fear in many of your posts, which also are irrelevant to the topic.

3. There will always be a small number of persons who may pose a threat for any number of reasons. I don't think there is a fear of the society we live in, but only some elements of it.

4. Is there a single cause, or definable multiple causes applicable to all criminal actions that can be eliminated totally?

I would prefer to live in a society in which guns are allowed but the need to put them to use for protection never occurs. Well, maybe the snakes might not go along with that.

 

Yeah, and just wait until the chimps and the orangutans show up!!!

It's guerrilla, actually.

 

Who says it needs to be equal? It just needs to be organized to outlast its enemy and to make it bleed. I mean, look at how much people in the US bitch about the casualties we are taking in Afghanistan, or the casualties we did take in Iraq. They can't even stomach the lopsided kill ratios we currently enjoy against what amounts to a militia force.

I think you're making a mistake in thinking that, during some sort of rebellion/revolt/civil war/whatever that the entire United States military, with its vast arsenal, would side with the United States government.

You're right, keeping the public "on message" is vital to any sort of guerrilla movement or insurgency. That said, there are always nations/groups eager to make a buck and that have a vested interest in seeing American hegemony fall. Now, what shape that support would take is just as dependent on the hypothetical scenario we are discussing here.

Its the same rationale that the men who wrote the 2nd Amendment were using. Were they dreaming too? Again, what makes you think all of those personnel will side with the government?

 

I'm not 'attacking' you. I just keep seeing you post the same questions, and am wondering why. I also wonder why you bother asking when: 'I’m saying that it seems to me that if people within a society are so fearful of crime that they feel they need guns to protect themselves from it that the policies in place to tackle crime are failing, and to me then wouldn't the best thing be to look at those policies rather than relying on having a lethal weapon?'
If you are going to say it has to be fear because people have a gun in their home - what else are they supposed to say to convince you it isn't due to fear? Anything and everything anybody has said you have just said: It must be fear. When they have responded you have said: Yeah, but that wouldn't be the case if it wasn't due to fear. Why don't you just call it a stale-mate?

Not yet.

 

What were we talking about? The 2nd amendment?

 

That's what is called progress.

 

And how exactly would banning guns tackle the underlying causes? Thank you for agreeing with us.