Those who hope (and plan) to command their fellow humans, all agree that their efforts to do, so would be made considerably easier, if their would-be subjects had no effective way to oppose them. Doesn't matter what orders they would issue, nor to whom. Experience shows that disarmed people tend ro be far more obedient, than those bearing the means to resist ... hence, an unending campaign to disarm putative subjects. Are you one of them?
absolutely nailed the issue. There has to be a check on state power. History shows over and over again why this is necessary. I was in Haiti during Operation restore democracy (don't laugh) and got to know some RCMP when the whole charade became Uphold democracy and the UN took over. They were good guys but they had absolutely no concept of God given rights. State power was all they knew.
I can't stand it when writers give an inanimate object like guns the ability to move, vote, think, or reproduce. They sure as hell don't have rights or commit violence. Guns sit there like a hammer. Drives me nuts.
Der-show-shitz is a child molester, among other things (or so I've been told online. Mud-slinging goes both ways.)
Good luck at the Convent of Perpetual Torture. Saint Raphael (or St. Ralph as I call him) is the Archangel of pain relief. May he watch over you, Brian, in your time of distress. Watch out for Sister Dolores.
the police show up to take a report, they don't protect any single individual. They may protect society at large if that society is generally law abiding and moral. And if police are the same.
I was a border patrol agent which was the only L.E. agency that was acceptable to me. Graduated first from the Border Patrol academy in Glynco, Georgia. I quit after I got off probation. Having a gun, badge, costume and the power of the state didn't do anything for me. Even though I thought that stopping illegal aliens was a good thing. When I left I was gifted a bottle of MD (mad dog) 2020, because my future was turning into a wino. Because I quit a government job.
I was also in the ARNG where we had L.E. of all sorts. city police, deputy sheriffs, ATF and a couple more. Most of them were men looking for 1. great retirement 2. perks and benefits 3. guys who wanted/had that arrogant I am better than the peasant attitude.
I remember one time we were all sitting around listening to the cops talking. They were talking and laughing about doing things that would have landed us peasants in jail. None of us laughed. But we all knew.
This isn't to say police/L.E. aren't necessary, someone has to take out the trash. And occasionally a dangerous job. Not as dangerous as an underground miner and other occupations but still can be dangerous.
What I am trying to convey is that living in a country where only the criminals and police (meaning government at every level) are armed is a very bad idea.
The 2nd amendment may not be much of a check on unrestrained government power but if it weren't something of a check why do they keep trying to disarm the relatively free non criminal citizens?
I believe that the only proof necessary is seeing how corrupt and political the f.b.i. has become. What does that tell you about all of the agencies/departments? All of them probably are.
The distinction between government prohibition vs rights grant is underappreciated in these debates. The Warren case context adds necessary weight to the self-defense argument, especially since most people genuinely dunno that police have zero duty to protect. I've noticed similar pattern in UK knife debates where reframing from 'weapon violence' to perpetrator accountability shifts the entire conversation. The repetitive debate format tho reflects broader issue with public discourse - we keep staging the same theatrical matchups expecting diferent outcomes instead of drilling into policy mechanics or data-driven risk models.
> Gun violence has become grimly familiar.
Government violence has always been grimly familiar.
--
Allbest on your hospital visit for your refurbishment. Merry Christmas!
Those who hope (and plan) to command their fellow humans, all agree that their efforts to do, so would be made considerably easier, if their would-be subjects had no effective way to oppose them. Doesn't matter what orders they would issue, nor to whom. Experience shows that disarmed people tend ro be far more obedient, than those bearing the means to resist ... hence, an unending campaign to disarm putative subjects. Are you one of them?
absolutely nailed the issue. There has to be a check on state power. History shows over and over again why this is necessary. I was in Haiti during Operation restore democracy (don't laugh) and got to know some RCMP when the whole charade became Uphold democracy and the UN took over. They were good guys but they had absolutely no concept of God given rights. State power was all they knew.
I can't stand it when writers give an inanimate object like guns the ability to move, vote, think, or reproduce. They sure as hell don't have rights or commit violence. Guns sit there like a hammer. Drives me nuts.
Der-show-shitz is a child molester, among other things (or so I've been told online. Mud-slinging goes both ways.)
Good luck at the Convent of Perpetual Torture. Saint Raphael (or St. Ralph as I call him) is the Archangel of pain relief. May he watch over you, Brian, in your time of distress. Watch out for Sister Dolores.
the police show up to take a report, they don't protect any single individual. They may protect society at large if that society is generally law abiding and moral. And if police are the same.
I was a border patrol agent which was the only L.E. agency that was acceptable to me. Graduated first from the Border Patrol academy in Glynco, Georgia. I quit after I got off probation. Having a gun, badge, costume and the power of the state didn't do anything for me. Even though I thought that stopping illegal aliens was a good thing. When I left I was gifted a bottle of MD (mad dog) 2020, because my future was turning into a wino. Because I quit a government job.
I was also in the ARNG where we had L.E. of all sorts. city police, deputy sheriffs, ATF and a couple more. Most of them were men looking for 1. great retirement 2. perks and benefits 3. guys who wanted/had that arrogant I am better than the peasant attitude.
I remember one time we were all sitting around listening to the cops talking. They were talking and laughing about doing things that would have landed us peasants in jail. None of us laughed. But we all knew.
This isn't to say police/L.E. aren't necessary, someone has to take out the trash. And occasionally a dangerous job. Not as dangerous as an underground miner and other occupations but still can be dangerous.
What I am trying to convey is that living in a country where only the criminals and police (meaning government at every level) are armed is a very bad idea.
The 2nd amendment may not be much of a check on unrestrained government power but if it weren't something of a check why do they keep trying to disarm the relatively free non criminal citizens?
I believe that the only proof necessary is seeing how corrupt and political the f.b.i. has become. What does that tell you about all of the agencies/departments? All of them probably are.
We give up the second amendment, we are done for.
The distinction between government prohibition vs rights grant is underappreciated in these debates. The Warren case context adds necessary weight to the self-defense argument, especially since most people genuinely dunno that police have zero duty to protect. I've noticed similar pattern in UK knife debates where reframing from 'weapon violence' to perpetrator accountability shifts the entire conversation. The repetitive debate format tho reflects broader issue with public discourse - we keep staging the same theatrical matchups expecting diferent outcomes instead of drilling into policy mechanics or data-driven risk models.
Unfortunately, I will not be getting any new guns this year…
Safe and healthy happenings, my friend, and Merry Christmas!