Owning Guns Doesn't Preserve Freedom

[bripat9643]

well not having them, doesnt help with freedom.......several examples of that...look it up

Most free countries have few guns and don't need them.

Most European countries have far lower rates of murder than the US, and without the guns. They also have more political choices than the US has, so to my mind, are also freer.

Most countries in Europe are mono-cultural. They lack the "diversity" left-wingers all claim is so beneficial. Most countries in Europe are not free. They are socialist nanny states that regulate your life down to the last detail. I have no idea what "more political choices" is supposed to mean. Does that imply a larger collection of rogues and scoundrels to choose from?

Once again, it has to be pointed out that democracy is not freedom.

 

[bripat9643]

Invading the US is just logistically impossible (unless Mexico or Canada do it, in which case it would last about ten minutes), and was even more so at the time of Japan's suicidal provocation.

It isn't gun-toting private citizens that would stop a trained army in North America. There is no comparison to Afghanistan and the Afghanis. But illusions are marvelous things and some people need to cling to them for their sense of identity.

Personally, I have no problem with or fear of firearms. I do fear idiocy of every kind that endangers me and others, from voting to shooting.

Whenever someone makes a comparison that disproves liberal delusions, the libturds always say there is no comparison. However, they are constantly comparing the United States to Europe, which we don't resemble in any way.

 

[bripat9643]

well not having them, doesnt help with freedom.......several examples of that...look it up

Most free countries have few guns and don't need them.

Most European countries have far lower rates of murder than the US, and without the guns. They also have more political choices than the US has, so to my mind, are also freer.

Not sure about the freedom part, but certainly more means of political expression.

such as?

 

[bripat9643]

I'd prefer actual freedom. Which has absolutely nothing to do with democracy at all. In the USA, back when it was actually a free country, we had a constitution republic, with democratically elected representatives.

You need to read more US history, amigo.

The USA was never the "FREE country" you imagine it having been.

The USA has, as but one example, never ever EVER tried to have a laisse faire economic system.

I point this out because many right winging ignoramouses imagine that we once had that kind of economy.

It's a big fat lie, amigo.

Doubt me?

What was the FIRST internal military action of this nation

REPRESSING the alcohol business of small farmers to be benefit of the RUM business.

Yeah that's right lad.

My guess is everything you think you know about this nation is a half truth at best.

The U.S. was closer than any other country ever has been, and it grew the fastest and became the richest and most powerful country as a result. saying it wasn't perfect indicates nothing of any interest.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Ask the people of Lybia, Syria, Egypt(well that doesn't always work out) or us in 1775 about how it doesn't preserve(make) freedom. Seriously? You people are working for the people that want to take it away.

 

[bripat9643]

I'd prefer actual freedom. Which has absolutely nothing to do with democracy at all. In the USA, back when it was actually a free country, we had a constitution republic, with democratically elected representatives.

You need to read more US history, amigo.

The USA was never the "FREE country" you imagine it having been.

The USA has, as but one example, never ever EVER tried to have a laisse faire economic system.

I point this out because many right winging ignoramouses imagine that we once had that kind of economy.

It's a big fat lie, amigo.

Doubt me?

What was the FIRST internal military action of this nation

REPRESSING the alcohol business of small farmers to be benefit of the RUM business.

Yeah that's right lad.

My guess is everything you think you know about this nation is a half truth at best.

I don't need a lecture on the failings of the system, pal.

What i do know, is that there was a time when laissez faire WAS the dominant economic system in place. Have it ever prevailed in total? No, it has not. There will always be people who busy themselves with meddling in economic affairs. The idea is to maximize that level of economic freedom that people have in making decisions, entering the markets and voluntary exchange.


Lad.

You have to understand, according to liberal "logic," if it wasn't absolutely perfect laizzes faire capitalism, then that proves laizzes faire is a failure and we have to implement communism.

That is actually how liberals think.

scary, isn't it?

 

[Spoonman]

here is what james madison said. you know, the dude who wrote the second amendment

"Americans need never fear their government
because of the advantage of being armed,
which the Americans possess over the people
of almost every other nation."

Also from Federalist #46

The argument under the present head may be put into a very concise form, which appears altogether conclusive. Either the mode in which the federal government is to be constructed will render it sufficiently dependent on the people, or it will not. On the first supposition, it will be restrained by that dependence from forming schemes obnoxious to their constituents. On the other supposition, it will not possess the confidence of the people, and its schemes of usurpation will be easily defeated by the State governments, who will be supported by the people.
The Federalist #46

There's something here that Madison clearly understood about the will and the consent of the Governed that seems to systematically be both trampled on and denied by the Conceit of Government. At best, in a Federalist Republic, Government tries to reflect and serve the will of the people, as opposed to dictating it. To some of us, this obstacle is seen as both an illusion, at least the source that feeds it's great appetite, and a corruption of a trust.

absolutely, these guys lived through it. they were trying to prevent what they had personally experienced.

 

[chikenwing]

Owning Guns Doesn't Preserve Freedom - Casey Michel - The Atlantic

Studies show there is very little correlation between heavily armed citizens and the presence of democracy in countries around the world.

After League City, Texas, became the first city in the state to pass a resolution effectively nullifying federal gun regulations in February, Councilwoman Heidi Thiess, who speared the motion, shared a quote. "Gen. Isoroku Yamamoto, who was the commander of Japan's WWII Combined Fleet, was asked why he never bothered to invade the U.S. after Pearl Harbor," she remarked. "And you know what he said? 'You can't invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.'"

It didn't matter that the quote is almost certainly false. The sentiment remains: The tether between that right to bear arms and the safety of liberal democracy is as real post-Newtown as it was following Pearl Harbor. And now that a handful of cities and counties across Texas have passed similar measures barring local officials from enforcing federal legislation, the link between your Glock and your unbridled freedoms becomes inseparable. "The Second Amendment was never meant for hunting, although that's what's been said over generations," Thiess continued. "It was a means of defense. Yes, self-defense, but also defense against our own government."

Personally, that attitude, the swaggering and blustering about how the nutter are gonna save us from the government or from invasion - its downright silly.

But, one can ignore the Mighty Mouse nonsense, its the rest of the article that's interesting.

So in other words your totally discrediting the intent of the founding fathers of this nation.

Those blustering nutters did save us from an oppressive government.And had the for sight and wisdom ,knowing dip shits like yourself,would one day do just what you do.

The second amendment was aimed directly at ass wipes like yourself.

 

[there4eyeM]

There are choices in between an economic system that leads to monopolies on one extreme and Marxist Communism on the other.

Neither are good for the soul.

 

[bripat9643]

There are choices in between an economic system that leads to monopolies on one extreme and Marxist Communism on the other.

Neither are good for the soul.

Laizzes faire doesn't lead to monopolies. Liberalism does.

 

[velvtacheeze]

Owning Guns Doesn't Preserve Freedom - Casey Michel - The Atlantic

Studies show there is very little correlation between heavily armed citizens and the presence of democracy in countries around the world.

After League City, Texas, became the first city in the state to pass a resolution effectively nullifying federal gun regulations in February, Councilwoman Heidi Thiess, who speared the motion, shared a quote. "Gen. Isoroku Yamamoto, who was the commander of Japan's WWII Combined Fleet, was asked why he never bothered to invade the U.S. after Pearl Harbor," she remarked. "And you know what he said? 'You can't invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.'"

It didn't matter that the quote is almost certainly false. The sentiment remains: The tether between that right to bear arms and the safety of liberal democracy is as real post-Newtown as it was following Pearl Harbor. And now that a handful of cities and counties across Texas have passed similar measures barring local officials from enforcing federal legislation, the link between your Glock and your unbridled freedoms becomes inseparable. "The Second Amendment was never meant for hunting, although that's what's been said over generations," Thiess continued. "It was a means of defense. Yes, self-defense, but also defense against our own government."

Personally, that attitude, the swaggering and blustering about how the nutter are gonna save us from the government or from invasion - its downright silly.

But, one can ignore the Mighty Mouse nonsense, its the rest of the article that's interesting.

The people of UK , Canada and Australia aren't free? Of course they are. The wingers have whipped themselves up into a paranoid frenzy. No one can be free with all these potential gun nutters around.

 

[Yurt]

the secnond amendment was put in place to preserve the citizens right(s) to freedom.

period.

 

[hortysir]

Owning Guns Doesn't Preserve Freedom

But taking them away restricts it

 

[Saigon]

There are choices in between an economic system that leads to monopolies on one extreme and Marxist Communism on the other.

Neither are good for the soul.

Not in BriPat's world.

Which is why he will never understand the first thing about politics as a conceot - someone who only sees in black & white can not conceive of colour.

 

[Saigon]

Most countries in Europe are mono-cultural. They lack the "diversity" left-wingers all claim is so beneficial. Most countries in Europe are not free. They are socialist nanny states that regulate your life down to the last detail. I have no idea what "more political choices" is supposed to mean. Does that imply a larger collection of rogues and scoundrels to choose from?

Nonsense from beginning to end -

The UK, France, Germany and Austria are every bit as multi-cultural as the US, and in some ciities, more so.

All countries in the EU ARE free, and in many cases more so than the US because we have multi-party democracy.

Most countries in the EU have conservative governments such as the UK and Germany, genius.

 

[PaulS1950]

The USA is NOT a DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!
The USA is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. The constitution requires that the federal government protect our individual and collective rights. The constitution limits the powers of the federal and state governments from restricting our rights. The only allowable restriction of any right is when it is used to infringe on the rights of another. That is why the criminally insane and violent offenders have no right to vote, freedom from search and no gun rights.

 

[Wildman]

are we doing more studies....I love liberals.........they're never manipulated!

Explain how the study was "manipulated" or STFU.

the above example of not knowing how to read in context, is why we conservatives look upon you liarberals as failures in a failed education system that is being replaced by an INDOCTRINATION system..., courtesy of your .gov !

he did NOT say the study was "manipulated", he said......, I love liberals.........they're never manipulated

 

[Saigon]

Wildman -

If you are going to post about your superior education - you might also consider posting in coherent English.

Do you know what a capital letter is for? How about commas?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I get a kick out of visualizing the gun nut fantasy world, in which, he and his militia buddies stand against the United States Army, fully expecting that, either:
1) The Army will be intimated by their AR-15's and retreat or surrender, or,
2) They will somehow defeat the United States army, and survive the experience.

For these people, I suggest that they Google "Waco"

 

[Saigon]

I get a kick out of visualizing the gun nut fantasy world, in which, he and his militia buddies stand against the United States Army, fully expecting that, either:
1) The Army will be intimated by their AR-15's and retreat or surrender, or,
2) They will somehow defeat the United States army, and survive the experience.

For these people, I suggest that they Google "Waco"

That's a good point.

You also have to wonder what would happen to the US economy during this civil war. What would a civil war do to production, tourism, the share market and house prices?

How many civilian lives would be lost?

And even if the militia won the war and founded an independent state - would it be viable? Who would want to live there?