Originally posted by Fledz
Sorry, it honestly would have made more sense if I hadn't gone and accidentally deleted 4 paragraphs of responses to you :(
Sometimes I really hate web browsers.
I can relate. I lost my first original post in this thread after about 3 paragraphs in the exact same way - accidentally clicked the back button and since I was at work, I was using IE, so I had to start all over again. That version made a lot more sense too, I promise!
Not to mention the fact that it was about 8am. pkc thought it was bad having to wade through reading all that crap at 930, imagine having to write it even before then and on about 2 hours of sleep nonetheless. =/
SuspicionVandit
When I go to PDD and see Krypton, or I read over this thread, I like to think of this scene in Space Balls.
Lord Helmet can be anyone, the dolls would be Krypton and :insert any issue:, and Colonel Sanderz would Lira.
denys envy
I hope all of you realize just how big of losers you are. Debating each other over this garbage... Wow, go kill yourselves with a gun, please.
Lebezniatnikov
Yes, our time would be much better spent talking about how much we love anal.
Lebezniatnikov
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
The state still has a monopoly on the use of power. That power is limited by the constitution. In the event the state throws out the constitution in some form of tyrannical takeover of the government by some radical faction, then the armed people have the power to resist. We have the right, as some of our Founding Fathers said, to resist tyranny...start a revolution.
Or, as Jefferson insisted, the obligation to revolt every few decades to keep government honest. Don't rely on the Founding Fathers argument - it's largely moot.
After all, Jefferson also said this:
"Reformation in government follows reformation in opinion."
It doesn't follow the use of guns; it follows non-violent processes.
And just for kicks, one of your Founding Fathers also said this:
"As revolutionary instruments (when nothing but revolution will cure the evils of the State) [secret societies] are necessary and indispensable, and the right to use them is inalienable by the people." --Thomas Jefferson
So maybe we should just all be members of Skull and Bones instead of carrying guns around. Somewhere, I think that Trancer is rolling in his bunk bed.
quote:
I never said it is the right of people to launch an armed insurrection ANYTIME. It is, though, the right of the people to resist tyranny of the state. You have asked, "who decides when the state is tyrannical?" Well, the constitution decides. If the state begins detaining people without charge, indefinitely, you know we're close. If the state suppresses freedom of speech, you know we're close. Freedom of religion, etc., etc. We are no where close to that, but history has shown, every state, no matter how well run, eventually devolves into chaos. Entropy.
We detain people without charge - extraordinary rendition.
We suppress freedom of speech all the time - various obscenity laws, prior restraint, etc.
We have laws proposed every year to institutionalize Christianity (creationism, school prayer) in our public schools.
So are we close to needing an armed insurrection or no? Again, who decides when we've crossed that line? You?
quote:
I'm not tearing down the American sovereignty. I defend the sovereignty of all countries, large and small, rich or poor, mighty or weak. My position is consistent. But we're not talking about the American regime's sovereignty. We're talking about it's and the people's powers, what they should be, and who has the right to use it.
Sovereignty (n.) = a sole legitimate authority (monopoly on power) over a population in a defined geographic territory.
That's the Weberian definition used by lawyers, political scientists, sociologists, etc. You're arguing that the people of the United States should be able to violently rise up and annul the power of the government they've democratically elected to represent them. That's not a sovereign government.
And why is it that the United States can't aid those doing the same in other countries? For instance, in Somalia, you argue that the Islamic Courts are sovereign simply because they exist... when in reality, they're pretty unpopular with a wide segment of the population, they institute organized repression based on clan and religious allegiances, and they practice corporal punishment on the same magnitude of the Taliban (who you also support). That's where the inconsistency lies.
quote:
I'll restate my position...The people should be armed (at least those non-criminals who want to be) so as to preserve their power in the event of a tyrannical state.
Preserve their power? What's the point in having a government if it is subject to the whims of the organized majority with guns? Not that an organized majority would ever be able to do anything against the national military - that's just lala land.
quote:
The right of the people to use power is only just when the American regime violates the constitution with which it is bound.
Depending on how it's interpreted, it's violated every day.
quote:
Think indefinite detentions,
Check.
quote:
show trials,
Check.
quote:
revoking of basic rights and freedoms,
Check.
Time for a revolution!
quote:
While the American regime respects the rights endowed by the constitution, then the state has a sole monopoly on the use of power.
I didn't realize that American sovereignty was so conditional, but the sovereignty of the Taliban was not.
denys envy
quote:
Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
Yes, our time would be much better spent talking about how much we love anal.
Word, anal is great.
saluyamo
quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Popular convention states that guns are merely tools - weapons like any other, only extensions of man's innately brutal and undeniably animalistic will to kill those of his kind over an innumerable amount of reasons. Do you agree that they are merely tools or is there something more to it?
Thanks for that...
To the question I'd have to say they are tools much like what swords/spears/bows were. They are a tool used to kill things (in defence or offence)
Halcyon+On+On
Been thinking about buying a gun lately... and listening to country music.
leph555
:stongue:
Moral Hazard
quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Been thinking about buying a gun lately... and listening to country music.
I'd say yes to the gun but rather then country you should go with bluegrass.
Halcyon+On+On
But bluegrass just can't quite convey how much I love my country nor please the fine folks at Frito-Lay for giving us the taste of a generation - a generation of choice and freedom.
/freedom fireworks
Moral Hazard
quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
But bluegrass just can't quite convey how much I love my country nor please the fine folks at Frito-Lay for giving us the taste of a generation - a generation of choice and freedom.
/freedom fireworks
Come on... nothing typifies America more then 4 appalacians, a mondolin, fiddle, bass, and slide guitar jammin' out while chewing some Redman plug and drinking burbon distilled in Jethro's wood-shack... unless of course they all have side by side stubby barrel Winchesters leaning against a stump some near a ragin' bonfire.
