I have access to firearms

[PoppingTom]

No you do not understand.

Human rights are inherent, not granted by men.

The laws men make do not affect them.

Even human rights are given by society.

Without society, they wouldn't exist.


Human rights aren't god given. They are just accepted by the majority of mankind.

To bear weapons isn't a human right.


I don't get why you don't understand this.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Your silly point aside, you should understand that that's not an actual a pic of Neanderthal man holding a spear.

http://image.spreadshirt.com/image-server/v1/designs/11737840,width=190,height=190/You-Don-t-Say-.png

 

[BotanyBoy]

To bear weapons isn't a human right.


I don't get why you don't understand this.

Yes it is, I don't get why you don't understand this.

 

[BotanyBoy]

So what do you need guns for if a spear is just as good at enabling you to exercise your rights?

Because I'm not a cave man and the spear is no longer the standard weapon a rifle is.

 

[islandman]

http://image.spreadshirt.com/image-server/v1/designs/11737840,width=190,height=190/You-Don-t-Say-.png

I didn't.

You did.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Even human rights are given by society.

Without society, they wouldn't exist.

Human rights aren't god given. They are just accepted by the majority of mankind.

To bear weapons isn't a human right.

I don't get why you don't understand this.

The United States was founded upon the idea that people had rights that were not granted them by Kings, but that those rights were inherent in every living person.

"Society" was a later invention. "Kings" were a later invention. They restricted those natural rights. "Right," in American English, does not mean "permission." To bear weapons is a human right. As is the freedom of speech.

 

[islandman]

The United States was founded upon the idea that people had rights that were not granted them by Kings, but that those rights were inherent in every living person.

Actually, if I recall correctly, the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England that precluded the everyday person from killing game in the forest, the sum of which was owned by the King.

So perhaps it's fair to say that the right to bear arms is "inherent" to Americans insofar as it is a reaction to King George III and his forest friends.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I didn't.

You did.

Oh I'm sorry I thought it was a response to the cpt. obvious statement of the week.

you should understand that that's not an actual a pic of Neanderthal man holding a spear

 

[bg23]

cool, we've wandered into relative vs absolute land.

 

[islandman]

Oh I'm sorry I thought it was a response to the cpt. obvious statement of the week.

Further "proof", this time of aliens visiting Earth and walking among ancient Egyptians. Feel free to deny its validity.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zsiGeg2Ce9U/TiVj9Ml6JwI/AAAAAAAAF2w/pf853quPH58/s1600/pyramid-aliens.png

 

[WantABWriter]

having access?

I have access to gasoline but I'm not an arsonist

I have access to whiskey but I'm not an alcoholic

I have access to food but.....well I do carry a few extra pounds of lets not go there

I have access to banks but I haven't robbed one

I have visited a Merceds dealer...so I have access...but I haven't stollen one..or bought one for that mattet...who am I kidding I can barely aford a Yugo

So what it all boils down to is my responsibility for my own actions.

These folks that think guns are the problem....Timothy McVey didn't use a gun in OKC.

But the shooter did at Fort Hood....you know if they just screened gun owners a little closer.....no wait he was in the militaty.....and he was a dr working with soldiers affected by violence.....wait a minute...how could that be......I mean he wasn't a nut....He worked and was an officer in the Army. He was a government employee....but he did only shoot his fellow employees....so he is not all that bad....is it?

How about the fellow in San Deigo that stole the tank? He didn't kill anyone but he sure left a trail of distruction.....and he too was an the militaty.....and he had access to a tank! Boy we sure need to screen those army guys a little closer don't we?

So without guns all the nuts will be cured....no 53 yo mental case will chase his social worked down the street in Flordia and stab her to death with a butcher knife......when guns are gone no one will use a kife.....and the mental case will be cured....just git rid of the guns and we can all sing Cum Ba Ya....

No it is the action of the person. If the man Adam in Conn had not be able to obtain a gun from his mom he would have gotten one some where. Lots of police cars have M-16's in the trunks. But if he had of done it that way maybe his mom would still be amougst us and just a cop or two dead before he headed to the school or mall. Bet he wouldn't have headed to the police station to shoot it out.

Criminals with guns want easy targets. They go to places they feel the victims will be disarmed. A gun in the hand of an honest law abiding citizen has stopped a lot of crime. Mostly because the criminal doesn't want to risk his life.

So access to a gun doesn't make a person a killer. It is the person....and if they want a gun bad enough they will get one. Police and Military have arsonals. Many has been broken into and looted.

When guns are outlawed only the criminals will have them. Guess they will still let cops carry guns and the soldiers to have them. But why there would be no more guns to threatne people...the law was passed.....just like the law that made schools "Gun Free Zones". But Adam Z didn't bother to read the sign!

Just my thoughts

Jack

 

[PoppingTom]

The United States was founded upon the idea that people had rights that were not granted them by Kings, but that those rights were inherent in every living person.

"Society" was a later invention. "Kings" were a later invention. They restricted those natural rights. "Right," in American English, does not mean "permission." To bear weapons is a human right. As is the freedom of speech.

I understand the idea (and that's how you called it: an idea).

But the idea was just a justification of the permission the new founded society granted to its people. Even freedom of speech is a permission, who knows this better than me?

"Right" is just a heightened word for "permission from society". I know that you take importance into the symbolism, but strictly spoken, there's no difference, except the major acceptance.

 

[Byron In Exile]

I understand the idea (and that's how you called it: an idea).

But the idea was just a justification of the permission the new founded society granted to its people. Even freedom of speech is a permission, who knows this better than me?

"Right" is just a heightened word for "permission from society". I know that you take importance into the symbolism, but strictly spoken, there's no difference, except the major acceptance.

No offense intended, but you speak like a slave.

 

[girlsmiley]

I have access to gasoline but I'm not an arsonist

I have access to whiskey but I'm not an alcoholic

I have access to food but.....well I do carry a few extra pounds of lets not go there

I have access to banks but I haven't robbed one

I have visited a Merceds dealer...so I have access...but I haven't stollen one..or bought one for that mattet...who am I kidding I can barely aford a Yugo

So what it all boils down to is my responsibility for my own actions.

These folks that think guns are the problem....Timothy McVey didn't use a gun in OKC.

But the shooter did at Fort Hood....you know if they just screened gun owners a little closer.....no wait he was in the militaty.....and he was a dr working with soldiers affected by violence.....wait a minute...how could that be......I mean he wasn't a nut....He worked and was an officer in the Army. He was a government employee....but he did only shoot his fellow employees....so he is not all that bad....is it?

How about the fellow in San Deigo that stole the tank? He didn't kill anyone but he sure left a trail of distruction.....and he too was an the militaty.....and he had access to a tank! Boy we sure need to screen those army guys a little closer don't we?

So without guns all the nuts will be cured....no 53 yo mental case will chase his social worked down the street in Flordia and stab her to death with a butcher knife......when guns are gone no one will use a kife.....and the mental case will be cured....just git rid of the guns and we can all sing Cum Ba Ya....

No it is the action of the person. If the man Adam in Conn had not be able to obtain a gun from his mom he would have gotten one some where. Lots of police cars have M-16's in the trunks. But if he had of done it that way maybe his mom would still be amougst us and just a cop or two dead before he headed to the school or mall. Bet he wouldn't have headed to the police station to shoot it out.

Criminals with guns want easy targets. They go to places they feel the victims will be disarmed. A gun in the hand of an honest law abiding citizen has stopped a lot of crime. Mostly because the criminal doesn't want to risk his life.

So access to a gun doesn't make a person a killer. It is the person....and if they want a gun bad enough they will get one. Police and Military have arsonals. Many has been broken into and looted.

When guns are outlawed only the criminals will have them. Guess they will still let cops carry guns and the soldiers to have them. But why there would be no more guns to threatne people...the law was passed.....just like the law that made schools "Gun Free Zones". But Adam Z didn't bother to read the sign!

Just my thoughts

Jack

Oh Lord, Cum Ba Ya...

 

[BotanyBoy]

Further "proof", this time of aliens visiting Earth and walking among ancient Egyptians. Feel free to deny its validity.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zsiGeg2Ce9U/TiVj9Ml6JwI/AAAAAAAAF2w/pf853quPH58/s1600/pyramid-aliens.png

Like I said....
http://www.britishmuseum.org/images/bsl_clovis_spear_point_channel_624x351.jpg
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/08/05/article-1204412-05F53091000005DC-770_233x384_popup.jpg
We have proof that mankind has been arming himself pretty much since day one.

But you're right....that's just a cray idea!! Why on earth would anyone need a weapon? Must be
http://segundocastelo.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/aliens-meme.jpg

 

[PoppingTom]

No offense intended, but you speak like a slave.

No offense intended, but in Germany, "I don't want to be a slave" is mostly said by people who are too lazy to take a job. We got some people here propagating the "right" to not work. And this includes not only the permission to not working, but also the money they could get from the government for their pure existence.

Yes, I'm working. I'm as independent from my government as I can be. Call me a slave because of that , like those lazybones. I know better.

I'm a slave? Because I don't share your illusion?

 

[Byron In Exile]

"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

 

[Byron In Exile]

No offense intended, but in Germany, "I don't want to be a slave" is mostly said by people who are too lazy to take a job. We got some people here propagating the "right" to not work. And this includes not only the permission to not working, but also the money they could get from the government for their pure existence.

Yes, I'm working. I'm as independent from my government as I can be. Call me a slave because of that , like those lazybones. I know better.

I'm a slave? Because I don't share your illusion?

No, but because you don't believe in human rights.

You think they're granted by governments, and not inherent.

Governments grant permissions and privileges.

But freedom of speech is a right, not a privilege.

It exists, my friend, whether a government allows it or not.

I don't understand how you cannot see that.

 

[PoppingTom]

No, but because you don't believe in human rights.

You think they're granted by governments, and not inherent.

Governments grant permissions and privileges.

But freedom of speech is a right, not a privilege.

It exists, my friend, whether a government allows it or not.

I don't understand how you cannot see that.

Because I was born and raised in a dictature, and I know that these rights can be taken away.

Off course I believe in human rights, and I live by that, I fought for that.

But, in the end, it's a permission thing. That doesn't make it a privilege instead of a right. I understand "right" as "permission that shall never be touched and will definitley demanded back by the majority if done so".

 

[julybaby04]

Because I was born and raised in a dictature, and I know that these rights can be taken away.

Off course I believe in human rights, and I live by that, I fought for that.

But, in the end, it's a permission thing. That doesn't make it a privilege instead of a right. I understand "right" as "permission that shall never be touched and will definitley demanded back by the majority if done so".

...perhaps this is the difference between America, and any other country in the world. Those freedoms are rights and many of those who have fought for those rights have done that be giving up their lives.

Maybe that is why those who choose to own guns are so vocal about the threat of having them taken away. They always want to be able to fight for their freedoms (especially against a government which chooses to take rights and freedoms away). This is the whole reason why America exists....and why people come here....they want to be free.....not to have to ask for permission to be free.

 

[eyer]

Actually, if I recall correctly, the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England that precluded the everyday person from killing game in the forest, the sum of which was owned by the King.

So perhaps it's fair to say that the right to bear arms is "inherent" to Americans insofar as it is a reaction to King George III and his forest friends.

Now all you have to do is provide any actual linkage to "the Framers" espousing your ridiculous offering above...

...you can do that, right?

 

[renard_ruse]

Even human rights are given by society.

Without society, they wouldn't exist.


Human rights aren't god given. They are just accepted by the majority of mankind.

To bear weapons isn't a human right.


I don't get why you don't understand this.

Wow, just wow. Where to begin? On second thought, why waste my time on a moron.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Actually, if I recall correctly, the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England that precluded the everyday person from killing game in the forest, the sum of which was owned by the King.

So perhaps it's fair to say that the right to bear arms is "inherent" to Americans insofar as it is a reaction to King George III and his forest friends.

You recall wrongly.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Because I was born and raised in a dictature, and I know that these rights can be taken away.

Off course I believe in human rights, and I live by that, I fought for that.

But, in the end, it's a permission thing. That doesn't make it a privilege instead of a right. I understand "right" as "permission that shall never be touched and will definitley demanded back by the majority if done so".

Well, then, you must understand that to oppress a right, such as that of free speech, does not mean it isn't a right.

A government might deny its citizens freedom of speech, but it is still a universal right, regardless of that.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Because I was born and raised in a dictature, and I know that these rights can be taken away.

Off course I believe in human rights, and I live by that, I fought for that.

But, in the end, it's a permission thing. That doesn't make it a privilege instead of a right. I understand "right" as "permission that shall never be touched and will definitley demanded back by the majority if done so".

So, Pol Pot created these mountains of skulls because it's all just a "permission thing"?