Guns violate our inalienable rights, rather than protect them

Originally posted by DaTroof
All men are born equal, Samuel Colt made a fortune by forcing them all to buy guns.

No one forced "them to all buy guns". It's a right, something you can choose to exercise or not.

reply to post by DaTroof

When I point a gun at you, what do you lose?

provided i have one to point back at you, nothing.

When gunplay occurs, what usually ends up getting lost?

since 'gunplay' requires more than one person, usually the loss is a life.

The psychological effect of killing a man(in defense), what right does that infringe.

is this really a question?
if so, none.

Originally posted by DaTroof

Originally posted by MJZoo
You're assuming gun owners are going around pointing guns at everyone. What rights does a gun sitting on someone's hip violate?

Sign this document, please.

*sets gun on table*

SIGN IT!


See, it doesn't even need to be pointed at you, just present to enact coercion.

lol...you say this...with the absolute and complete mental inability to CONSIDER that THIS is exactly how the government controls people and EXACTLY why PEOPLE need guns....and EXACTLY why the 2nd amendment was written...

Lets try your story again but this time well use a little more brain power to get the point across...


Sign this document, please.

*sets gun on table*

SIGN IT!

*Set my gun on the table*

NO!

have a nice day...

reply to post by Auricom


It's not a fake story, and if you where worth the time I could post the news paper article and dig up the court records.

Keep trying though, it's hilariously entertaining.

Pladuim

Originally posted by DaTroof

Originally posted by MJZoo
You're assuming gun owners are going around pointing guns at everyone. What rights does a gun sitting on someone's hip violate?

Sign this document, please.

*sets gun on table*

SIGN IT!


See, it doesn't even need to be pointed at you, just present to enact coercion.

the vision that came to mind as i read the above was my first trip to a DMV (dept motor vehicles)

yep, armed govt agents all around and what were we told about the 'license' ??

not, this is an invalid contract but we'd really appreciate it if you'd just voluntarily surrender your rights ... nooooo, it was "verify the information and sign here"

Originally posted by DaTroof
Sign this document, please.

*sets gun on table*

SIGN IT!

See, it doesn't even need to be pointed at you, just present to enact coercion.

You're just reinforcing the importance of the 2nd amendment. You can't take away guns from criminals, they'll always find a way to get their hands on them. I would hope the person being threatened in your ill conceived attempt at an argument had away to defend himself. Like a fire arm of some sort.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by DaTroof

 

When I point a gun at you, what do you lose?

provided i have one to point back at you, nothing.

When gunplay occurs, what usually ends up getting lost?

since 'gunplay' requires more than one person, usually the loss is a life.

The psychological effect of killing a man(in defense), what right does that infringe.

is this really a question?
if so, none.

1. OK, and supposing you don't?
2. Correct.
3. Yes, it is a question. The correct answer is that it violates your Pursuit of Happiness. Now you have to be worried about retaliation, and depending on how much family the individual had, you may have to confront his/her parents or children in court for a civil suit.

Originally posted by forgetmenot

Originally posted by DaTroof
Sign this document, please.

*sets gun on table*

SIGN IT!

See, it doesn't even need to be pointed at you, just present to enact coercion.

You're just reinforcing the importance of the 2nd amendment. You can't take away guns from criminals, they'll always find a way to get their hands on them. I would hope the person being threatened in your ill conceived attempt at an argument had away to defend himself. Like a fire arm of some sort.

What good would another firearm do? You think you're just gonna quick draw and shoot before Greedo? This isn't Hollywood.

Originally posted by DaTroof

Originally posted by forgetmenot

Originally posted by DaTroof
Sign this document, please.

*sets gun on table*

SIGN IT!

See, it doesn't even need to be pointed at you, just present to enact coercion.

You're just reinforcing the importance of the 2nd amendment. You can't take away guns from criminals, they'll always find a way to get their hands on them. I would hope the person being threatened in your ill conceived attempt at an argument had away to defend himself. Like a fire arm of some sort.

What good would another firearm do? You think you're just gonna quick draw and shoot before Greedo? This isn't Hollywood.

so your options are to surrender?

or violate the laws of physics and disintegrate guns from existence and the knowledge of them as well?

because those are the only two options you are presenting...in the real world there is always at least one gun at that table...two guns makes it a little more equal...

and you have to realize that

you think you're just gonna quick draw and shoot before Greedo? This isn't Hollywood.

applies to the guy who initially brought the gun to the table....but ONLY if you have one too...

For all you anti-gun enthusiasts, let me introduce myself. I am a mature, responsible adult who makes intelligent choices. I have never been involved in a mass killing, or any killing for that matter. I have been around and used guns all my life. I have never once had an overwhelming desire to shoot another individual.

So why are you afraid of me owning a firearm? Or do you not like it that I don't buy into your philosophy about guns. There will always be those who will do evil no matter the circumstance. Why should what a few individuals do impede my rights? Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to downplay the serious nature of recent tragic events, I am saying it is the rare individual that commits crimes of this nature.

Gun bans are not the answer. The true answer is we live in a world that is fraught with danger. The world we live in will never be perfect and harm free. If you are looking to have a utopia, then you are living a delusion. You will never be 100% safe no matter how many laws and lawyers you have. Be afraid of those who will cause you harm, respect those who do not and be savvy enough to know the difference.

reply to post by DaTroof

1. why wouldn't i ?
2. yes, sometimes but not always.
**** both currently and historically, more ppl die by blade than any firearm.

3. you are making assumptions based on a falsehood.
all those maybeeees are possible but each situation cannot be groomed to fit your model.
mine didn't.

and while the event did disturb/interrupt my pursuit of happiness, it did not remove/negate my right to continue that pursuit once the intrusion was resolved.

and don't even try to imply that the gun invited the intrusion as gun's presence wasn't previously known.

reply to post by DaTroof


In response to your "place a gun on the table and force you to sign it" analogy....

What do you think the government does to us on a daily basis?

Pay your taxes. Pay the interest. Follow these laws. Don't ingest that plant. And if you don't do what we say we will come after you with a gun and throw you in jail....and if you try to run, we'll kill you.

If you're one ATS, chances are that you already know the extent of corruption that runs through our Government. Why, then, would you EVER voluntarily disarm yourself (and forcibly disarm others) so that 'those in power' would be the only one with guns? (Other 'ordinary' criminals would also still be able to find guns...reference the 'war on drugs' for proof of that.) That's like leaving the wolves in charge of the sheep. It. Just. Don't. Make. Sense.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -Benjamin Franklin


Look, I know you have good intentions. You don't like violence, especially gun violence. Who does? 99.9% of the people I've met simply want what is BEST for their life, the life of the ones they love, and the world. Now, the tricky thing, is 'agreeing' upon what is 'best' for us. I am not a fan of violence. I strive to promote peace, love and unity. I pray I never have to turn my gun on someone. But it is short sighted and dangerous to assume that the Government is better able to protect yourself than you are.

cheers.

Originally posted by DaTroof
What good would another firearm do? You think you're just gonna quick draw and shoot before Greedo? This isn't Hollywood.

No, it's not Hollywood. Which is why you're "argument" regarding people being forced to sign documents at gun point is, at best, laughable. But if it did happen at least there would be a chance for the other guy if he was armed.

If you would like to be a victim should that situation arise, that is your choice.

reply to post by Sly1one


As silly as it sounds, the disintegrate option. We have no idea what the pyramids were for, and how long ago were they built? I'm sure they were used for quite some time before the BS tomb story. However long it takes to disarm the world where generations of people who have never seen a single bullet or missile or any of that is worth the wait, and it has to start now.

it is clear that the 2nd amendment, pertains to stopping future tyrannical american governments from infringing on the rights of citizens laid out in the enumerated "bill of rights" document. it is laid out in plain language not only in the constitution, but in the federalist papers, where it is clearly explained as well. the founders did not put a right to own arms and have the ability to bear them, for mere home protection or hunting. if so, that would have been the focus of the words and meaning of the 2nd amendment. and when anyone says, they only had muskets back then, you have to consider that it was the most advanced weapon at that time. the second amendment DID NOT say you have the right to bear knives, swords, only....it says "arms".
i am left of center, but i can read and understand, the meaning and more importantly the intent, of the 2nd amendment, as well as the rest of the amendments. they were deliberately made clear, and absolute, so as to be understood by all, and not open to change due to vague interpretations.....as far as the other amendments...those are for other threads

Originally posted by DaTroof
reply to post by Sly1one

 

As silly as it sounds, the disintegrate option. We have no idea what the pyramids were for, and how long ago were they built? I'm sure they were used for quite some time before the BS tomb story. However long it takes to disarm the world where generations of people who have never seen a single bullet or missile or any of that is worth the wait, and it has to start now.

lol seriously...Well I guess ill get on my unicorn dragon that breathes (not fire its dangerous) rainbows and fly off to another universe...because if your option is possible...so is that...

reply to post by DaTroof

i'm pretty sure that by then ...

However long it takes to disarm the world where generations of people who have never seen a single bullet or missile or any of that is worth the wait, and it has to start now

the galactic counsel will have firm regulations in place to mitigate laser damage as well

ETA - that 'counsel' was on purpose for those who thought i meant the other "council"
lawyers ... too bad that with or without guns, we seem to be stuck with them

I want you to know that I'm not entirely against the idea of self-defense. I'm against those means being fatal. We need to set our phasers to stun, so to speak.

If you or your wife/husband, and your children are being attacked, are you really going to be concerned with the well fare of the person doing the attacking??? Most people who are being attacked simply want one thing, for it to STOP and sometimes in order to do that fatal means are the only ones that are going to work, so until we have a phaser that you can set to stun and simply knock someone out then I'll keep my gun and use it to protect me and mine.

Guns do violate our inalienable right to life liberty and property all the time. Overwhelmingly when they are in the hands of the government.




The only thing that stopped it from happening in the United States was civilian owned firearms. The government has no compunction against shooting its citizens. Those who seek power are often psychopaths. They gravitate to the seat of power like a moth to a flame. Read Political Ponerology and see if you want to see the United States citizens disarmed. Political Ponerology Preview PDF

Guns are just the latest method of killing. Before, Homo Sapiens used sticks and rocks and then better sticks and rocks (spears) and then betterer sticks and rocks (the spear chucker apparatus) and so forth until you reach now. Later we'll be killing each other with viruses and angry ass smart particles and other self replicating goodness.

My point being that humans have always had violence and guns are not the beginning or the end of the cosmic conundrum of how humans can cause so much pain to one another