Florida Firm Offers Free AK-47s To New Customers

[pocketfullofshells]

Pockets has used that same line of argument numerous times on this forum. And, each time his argument is completely destroyed, but he fails to learn.

This at its essence, is a failure to learn from history. Even if he learned anything from the American Revolution, he would know his argument is fallacious. I believe someone great once said it takes but 10% of the populace of a nation to overthrow their government.

In his mind, he really thinks the American military would massacre the American people should they revolt.

someone once said that...great...does not make it true. the US took over Iraq, one of the more armed nations on earth...in a matter of days...and it had a real army....and we did not even go all out for that.

But you just keep saying you won some argument ...I am sure in your mind you did...but of course..that means nothing...

 

[GenSeneca]

Gen seem to think that we should be able to...you know what ever arms you can get, you have a right to.

Yes, the Constitution doesn't place a limit on "arms", just as it doesn't place limits on how much or what kind of speech you can engage in, or how much and what kind of religion you have a right to exercise. It's only after you use your rights to violate the rights of another that you should lose your rights.

My point is the same..if you say we have the right to arms, but then you place a limit..then you agree that there is a logical limit..and thus the only issue is where is it...Gen does not agree with a logical limit.

I just stated the logical limit, you cannot use your rights to violate the rights of others and if you do, YOU are the one who loses your rights... Unlike you, I don't support punishing everyone for the crimes committed by just a few people.

In the 20's Americans could purchase full auto machine guns at the hardware store, Sears even sold them mail order out of a catalog without so much as a background check, but because people used their freedom to infringe on the rights of others, people like you decided to punish them and all future generations by eliminating that freedom for everybody.

If there was a coup, and the Citizens had to fight back...the only way its not a slaughter is if half the army sides with the people...

There is another way, which the founder wanted us to have, allow civilians the freedom to arm themselves.

 

[Gipper]

If there was a coup, and the Citizens had to fight back...the only way its not a slaughter is if half the army sides with the people...and then all the shotguns you want are still not make a spit ball of a difference.

the only check you have against a military as big as ours...is Cut off there checks and reduce them to a size the people can control...of course then they can't do anything else.

Proof you have NOT learned from history.

You really believe the US military would slaughter the American people if they revolted. The military would use tanks, planes, artillery, and all their fire power to mercilessly kill millions of Americans. And you then conclude, what is the point of individual Americans owning guns.

There are no nice words to describe this opinion.

How about this? Do you remember the USSR? It completely dissolved thanks in part to the Great One...remember? During it's dissolution, did the Soviet military massacre the people? It certainly could have. Did the Soviets massacre the people of eastern Europe when they revolted from the Red Menace? They certainly could have used all their fire power to kill millions, but they did not. And, the Soviets were ruthless commies.

This is but one example. There are numerous others.

 

[Dr.Who]

Gen seem to think that we should be able to...you know what ever arms you can get, you have a right to.

Until the constitution is changed we do.

 

[Dr.Who]

If there was a coup, and the Citizens had to fight back...the only way its not a slaughter is if half the army sides with the people...and then all the shotguns you want are still not make a spit ball of a difference.

the only check you have against a military as big as ours...is Cut off there checks and reduce them to a size the people can control...of course then they can't do anything else.

We do not need to prevail militarily to win. We would only need to scare the politicians into being honest.

The Oklahoma bomber was crazy but he did succeed as a single man in scaring congress. I doubt they have improved any but they were scared.

Ten crazy people like him could actually cause them to change. I think we saw glimmers of change after that last congresswoman was shot.

Ten thousand would be able to alter the shape of our gov.

1 mill (with rocks, maybe even just with signs) could pull off a successful revolt in which Washington was altered forever with such a wide spread turnover that we could call it a coup.

But you are right that barely armed Americans would not be able to resist the army to completely overthrow the gov. The numbers of people that would be required are so great that they would be much more effective just voting.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

We do not need to prevail militarily to win. We would only need to scare the politicians into being honest.

The Oklahoma bomber was crazy but he did succeed as a single man in scaring congress. I doubt they have improved any but they were scared.

Ten crazy people like him could actually cause them to change. I think we saw glimmers of change after that last congresswoman was shot.

Ten thousand would be able to alter the shape of our gov.

1 mill (with rocks, maybe even just with signs) could pull off a successful revolt in which Washington was altered forever with such a wide spread turnover that we could call it a coup.

But you are right that barely armed Americans would not be able to resist the army to completely overthrow the gov. The numbers of people that would be required are so great that they would be much more effective just voting.

and of course, until be blew up the truck bomb killing hundreds...you think he was fine to have it...


Funny I bet if he was a Muslim , with a bomb...do you think most people would say well he has the right to have a suicide vest on where ever he wants...But if he blows it up, we will charge him?

I think the Founding fathers where smarter then you guys give them credit for..they where not blithering idiots would think thats a good idea.

 

[GenSeneca]

I think the Founding fathers where smarter then you guys give them credit for..

That's a keeper... Especially coming from someone who, just a few posts ago, said the founders were too stupid to "future proof" the law.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

That's a keeper... Especially coming from someone who, just a few posts ago, said the founders were too stupid to "future proof" the law.

being stupid and being able to see into the future...not the same...

 

[GenSeneca]

being stupid and being able to see into the future...not the same...

Agreeing that we have a Constitutional right to bear arms and then saying that right only extends to certain firearms that meet with your approval... Not the same thing.

 

[Gipper]

"[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually." --George Mason

Many Americans know what Mr. Mason said is still true today...with our current tyrannical federal government. But, apparently many others are not capable of understanding this simple logic and are fully prepared to give up their rights. Why?

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. --Benjamin Franklin

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."---George Mason