Michael Moore is a Moron.

[Joeybagadonuts]

I think he saw that episode of Star Trek where Kirk violates the prime directive and interferes in a galactic war, so that the inhabitants of both planets could not ignore the horrors of war.

 

[CHNOPS]

LOL.. nice spin. Yes, as history has shown us, when a government does not take guns from the popuation, the population can resist the government. If the government outlaws guns, or prevents the populace from every getting a lot of guns the population did not resist.

Or do you not understand revolutions?

Yes, revolutions are easy to understand. Your position is a different story. Here is what you have said:

1) Guns help people resist the government.
2) The government takes people's guns.

If guns help people resist the government, how is the government able to take someone's gun? Why not just use the gun to resist?

 

[Ramp1311]

Sigh, I didn't prove shit for you.

Do you even understand the context of what was happening in Germany at the time?

Do you know anything about the Treaty of Versailles? The political and economic conditions in Germany after the Treaty?

As it also states, the gun laws were in effect because both the left and right had they had access to guns, it was feared they would try to overthrow the democratic government.

I will try this one more time. Governments disarm the populace so they can control them. Alot of Europe did not allow their population to have gun, and/or took the guns away, (which you link proved.)

Do you understand the conditions in Germany throughout it's history? Do you understand what governments can and will so to it's unarmed populations?

Please spare me about how bad it was in Germany after Germany attacked the rest of Europe (which may not have happened if their populations had been armed)

I will not argue with you about how bad it was in Germany after WWI. A fedgling governmant has lots to fear from everybody. But then explain the other gun control governments that have been established for decades or centuries around the world, why so they do it?

 

[Ramp1311]

Yes, revolutions are easy to understand. Your position is a different story. Here is what you have said:

1) Guns help people resist the government.
2) The government takes people's guns.

If guns help people resist the government, how is the government able to take someone's gun? Why not just use the gun to resist?

Because at that point the government is not a threat, and people will talk/believe like many of you who favor gun control.....

The government takes the guns because they fear the population. That the government fears the population is a good thing.........

This is too easy....

 

[CHNOPS]

Because at that point the government is not a threat, and people will talk/believe like many of you who favor gun control.....

The government takes the guns because they fear the population. That the government fears the population is a good thing.........

This is too easy....

I'm glad you find this easy. Let's make it even easier.

You have a gun. A government agent knocks on your door and tells you that you can no longer have it. He says you have to give it to him, or else go to jail.

Do you see him as a threat?

 

[Ramp1311]

I understand whay many of you favor gun control. The liberal university professors have pounded the evils of it into your brain. They tried it with me when I attended Brown. However, common sense tells you that an armed population is a control over the government, as it was over England in the
1700's. It is much harder to impose your will over somebody who is standing, armed, than a person who is standing unarmed......

 

[Thebee123]

Silly conservatives

So I agree we should limit governmental controls, say "yea" conservatives!

Then why does the government want to have the power to execute criminals?

And limit the power for woman to choose to have or have not a child?

Y'all need to find a coherent philosophy. Even a dumb shit like me sees you are ass-backwards.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I will not argue with you about how bad it was in Germany after WWI. A fedgling governmant has lots to fear from everybody. But then explain the other gun control governments that have been established for decades or centuries around the world, why so they do it?

It saves lives, prevents massacres, makes the population feel safer. As I already linked governments that want dead groups of people usually accomplish it and usually accomplish it rather easily when all is said and done.

It is of course possible that things would have gone differently had the Jews been armed. It's unlikely if you look at history but it's not impossible. For all we know the reason Hitler survived so many assassination attempts is because he was never shot by a Jew. It's like wise possible that an armed Japanese population wouldn't have been slaughtered after WWII. Its even more likely that had Chavez hadn't disarmed Yugoslavia that they wouldn't have suffered such horrific massacres. If more Australians were armed they wouldn't be afraid of all the wild life. (To be honest I wouldn't visit Australia without a flame thrower, night vision googles, and a guy who wrestles crocs for fun and even then I wouldn't sleep there.)

Oh, and nice try wiggling out of very clearly meaning that the Nazi's took the guns and did so specifically to slaughter the Jews. I haven't seen such masterful backpedaling in a while. You should be fun.

 

[Ramp1311]

I'm glad you find this easy. Let's make it even easier.

You have a gun. A government agent knocks on your door and tells you that you can no longer have it. He says you have to give it to him, or else go to jail.

Do you see him as a threat?

Yes I do, as he is breaking the law, 2nd amendment.....

 

[Sean Renaud]

Yes I do, as he is breaking the law, 2nd amendment.....

Except plenty of courts have interpreted differently. The Constitution has limitations.

 

[Ramp1311]

Except plenty of courts have interpreted differently. The Constitution has limitations.

Yes, it does. Those limitations are there to limit the government, or do you disagree?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Yes, it does. Those limitations are there to limit the government, or do you disagree?

They also limit the population. The initial goal may was to limit government but over the last two centuries we've kinda realized the world has changed significantly.

 

[CHNOPS]

Yes I do, as he is breaking the law, 2nd amendment.....

OK. And what would you do with your gun?

 

[Ramp1311]

OK. And what would you do with your gun?

Unless they had a warrant, .....

Like any good American..

He would have to have a reason, or he is breaking the law.... and a criminal

 

[CHNOPS]

Unless they had a warrant, .....

Like any good American..

He would have to have a reason, or he is breaking the law.... and a criminal

Let's say his reason is that your state just passed a gun law that made your gun illegal, and that he could prove it.

 

[Ramp1311]

It saves lives, prevents massacres, makes the population feel safer. As I already linked governments that want dead groups of people usually accomplish it and usually accomplish it rather easily when all is said and done.

It is of course possible that things would have gone differently had the Jews been armed. It's unlikely if you look at history but it's not impossible. For all we know the reason Hitler survived so many assassination attempts is because he was never shot by a Jew. It's like wise possible that an armed Japanese population wouldn't have been slaughtered after WWII. Its even more likely that had Chavez hadn't disarmed Yugoslavia that they wouldn't have suffered such horrific massacres. If more Australians were armed they wouldn't be afraid of all the wild life. (To be honest I wouldn't visit Australia without a flame thrower, night vision googles, and a guy who wrestles crocs for fun and even then I wouldn't sleep there.)

Oh, and nice try wiggling out of very clearly meaning that the Nazi's took the guns and did so specifically to slaughter the Jews. I haven't seen such masterful backpedaling in a while. You should be fun.

Have you lived under a dictator? have you lived under an oppressive regime? Neither have I, however the people that have, FAVOR an armed populace....

I will take their word for it....

By the way, if you do not read and comprehend the thread, then do not try and answer in the thread. You need to reread what I said about how Europe either was disarmed or never armed in the first place....... wow....

 

[Sean Renaud]

Have you lived under a dictator? have you lived under an oppressive regime? Neither have I, however the people that have, FAVOR an armed populace....

I will take their word for it....

By the way, if you do not read and comprehend the thread, then do not try and answer in the thread. You need to reread what I said about how Europe either was disarmed or never armed in the first place....... wow....

You said that MUCH later. And I live under Obama the most oppressive regime in the history of the world. Where the fuck have you been?

I'm uncertain that it's relevant what the people who have lived under oppressive regimes think, especially since your evidence is likely all anecdotal.

 

[Ramp1311]

Let's say his reason is that your state just passed a gun law that made your gun illegal, and that he could prove it.

Well, since no state would do that, if they tried it would not pass, then your question is moot.

That is why we have a constitution and why I live here instead of another country that has made guns illegal......

I am to assume you would give up all your rights at the drop of a hat....?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Well, since no state would do that, if they tried it would not pass, then your question is moot.

That is why we have a constitution and why I live here instead of another country that has made guns illegal......

I am to assume you would give up all your rights at the drop of a hat....?

States have done in the past you realize that right?

 

[CHNOPS]

Well, since no state would do that, if they tried it would not pass, then your question is moot.

That is why we have a constitution and why I live here instead of another country that has made guns illegal......

I am to assume you would give up all your rights at the drop of a hat....?

I don't think you know what 'moot' means. The question is explicitly moot.

Humor me.

He has a warrant.

What would you do with your gun?

 

[Ramp1311]

You said that MUCH later. And I live under Obama the most oppressive regime in the history of the world. Where the fuck have you been?

I'm uncertain that it's relevant what the people who have lived under oppressive regimes think, especially since your evidence is likely all anecdotal.

Again, go reread my posts and find where I said that the NAZI's disarmed the population...

I told you, I have not, but I have second hand information from people in the camps (family that survived), ex-German wehrmach soliders in WWII. I also have family that moved from Russia recently.

I will agree with you about Obama. It is not that oppressive yet, but I have my passport ready to go if it does...... Iceland is a lovely country.....

 

[Ramp1311]

States have done in the past you realize that right?

Did it stand? No.....

 

[Ramp1311]

I don't think you know what 'moot' means. The question is explicitly moot.

Humor me.

He has a warrant.

What would you do with your gun?

Since we have almost 800,000 words in out American English Language, there are many defintions of moot.....

I meant an irrelevant question, as it will not happen. By the time that would happen, the country is not America, and I am not longer a citizen.....

 

[Ramp1311]

There is a reason I have dual citizenship....... as do my children

 

[CHNOPS]

Since we have almost 800,000 words in out American English Language, there are many defintions of moot.....

I meant an irrelevant question, as it will not happen. By the time that would happen, the country is not America, and I am not longer a citizen.....

OK, fair enough.

We're not in America, now, we're in an unnamed European country, whose laws are fluid at best.

You own a gun.

Government man knocks on your door and says it's his now. Give it to him and you'll have no trouble. Don't give it to him and he'll kill your child.

What do you do?