I have access to firearms

[Byron In Exile]

...to ignorants, yes!

Look, Tom... saying that rights are whatever the state decides is wrong.

Then "human rights" means nothing.

It's what the government decides?

That means that "rights" in Iran are what their government says they are.

And then, you can't defend "human rights" anymore, because you just made them evaporate.

 

[Biker_Type]

important update, in view of the interest by the guvmint in coming after and registering firearms, i sold all mine (27 of them ) to my neighbor. he's a pretty nice guy who only started drinking after he got out of the asylum last week!

 

[PoppingTom]

Look, Tom... saying that rights are whatever the state decides is wrong.

Then "human rights" means nothing.

It's what the government decides?

I'm speechless.

Should I repeat what I think and nobody of you can and want to disprove?


You think you're not livin in a democracy. Your problem.
You think the government are aliens, and not a tool of your society (if you ever understand the meaning of that word). Your problem.
You think god gives and takes and nobody else, so there's no reason to influence anything. Your problem.

What else shall I tell you but: I feel sorry for you?

 

[PoppingTom]

That means that "rights" in Iran are what their government says they are.

And then, you can't defend "human rights" anymore, because you just made them evaporate.

You can define them, because the world does. You can defend them, because the world is on your side.

Human rights is what everybody wants and everybody can afford, that's why everybody can and will demand it.

If people don''t want human rights, you can't do anything about it. but most of the time they want, everywhere.

 

[Byron In Exile]

You can define them, because the world does. You can defend them, because the world is on your side.

Human rights is what everybody wants and everybody can afford, that's why everybody can and will demand it.

If people don''t want human rights, you can't do anything about it. but most of the time they want, everywhere.

"Human rights" is meaningless when you say it is whatever the government wants.

What is the world, but nations? And nations make their own laws.

So "human rights" is simply what each nation's government wants, correct?

 

[Byron In Exile]

I'm speechless.

Should I repeat what I think and nobody of you can and want to disprove?


You think you're not livin in a democracy. Your problem.
You think the government are aliens, and not a tool of your society (if you ever understand the meaning of that word). Your problem.
You think god gives and takes and nobody else, so there's no reason to influence anything. Your problem.

What else shall I tell you but: I feel sorry for you?

I feel sorry for you, because you are a sheep being led to the slaughter.

Go quietly, then, my friend.

 

[islandman]

"Human rights" is meaningless when you say it is whatever the government wants.

What is the world, but nations? And nations make their own laws.

So "human rights" is simply what each nation's government wants, correct?

No, 'human rights' are simply what each nation's populace wants.

 

[PoppingTom]

What is the world, but nations? And nations make their own laws.

What are nations?

Alien spaceships that you, the free people, keep at bay?

 

[Byron In Exile]

What are nations?

Alien spaceships that you, the free people, keep at bay?

Like Germany.

They tell you that you can't own firearms, and you say, "yes, master."

They tell you that you cannot say certain things, and you say, "yes, master."

 

[PoppingTom]

I feel sorry for you, because you are a sheep being led to the slaughter.

Seriously, Byron, I could say this about you.

I believe, I'm living in a democracy. I can give my vote to whoever I think works best for my interest, or can become a politician myself, if I want to.
I'm living in a society, and I know it. People do things for me, and I do things for people. The government is a tool, but it isn't only mine. It's that of the society.

You gave that up. Maybe you dream about overcoming the government, to destroy it. Totally freedom! No taxes! How wonderful !

I give you less than 2 years after that, and you got a dictatorship. Not made by government. Made by free people with guns, overmaster other people with guns, forming alliances to overmaster other people with guns. Nobody can stop them. They made their own "rights". You have to suck it.


Maybe then, you understand the democracy you live in today.

 

[PoppingTom]

Like Germany.

They tell you that you can't own firearms, and you say, "yes, master."

That's bullshit, and you know it.

 

[Byron In Exile]

That's bullshit, and you know it.

I wouldn't have believed it, but you've proved otherwise.

 

[koalabear]

https://www.facebook.com/TwoMillionGunOwnersAgainstGunControl

 

[PoppingTom]

I wouldn't have believed it, but you've proved otherwise.

It was me who said that Germans own 25 million firearms, even more than Canada and Mexico.

From wherever you got your "proof"......

 

[PoppingTom]

https://www.facebook.com/TwoMillionGunOwnersAgainstGunControl

350 million firearms.

2 million against gun control.

Is less than one percent, right?

 

[koalabear]

350 million firearms.

2 million against gun control.

Is less than one percent, right?

There is also 1 million Moms for gun control. I'll let you figure that %.

 

[PoppingTom]

There is also 1 million Moms for gun control. I'll let you figure that %.

I believe, you'll get your majority for that, if you pray every day for it.

 

[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?

How's your recollection today, islandman?

 

[Ishmael]

How's your recollection today, islandman?

About the same as it was before, occluded. The inclusion of the 2nd amendment had nothing to do with 'game hunting.'

Ishmael

 

[Byron In Exile]

About the same as it was before, occluded. The inclusion of the 2nd amendment had nothing to do with 'game hunting.'

Exactly.

 

[eyer]

About the same as it was before, occluded. The inclusion of the 2nd amendment had nothing to do with 'game hunting.'

Ishmael

George Mason may know that, I might believe that, and you might very well say that...

...but islandman evidently "knows" something that none of us do, and since he fancies himself such an intellectual of this Board, I just feel he should be accorded opportunity to explain his incredible input on such a vital American topic.

Or...

...at least he could tell us why he disingenuously chose to pull that particular tale out of his azz.

But...

...he'll most likely ignore the entire thing now that Google can't even help him save face.

He now joins his buddy mercury14 in The [Self-Proclaimed] Intellectuals of LIT Stumble as They Speak series...

...the president doesn't have to submit a budget and historically it's not done.

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=40494637&postcount=16

 

[Ishmael]

Of the period, among all of the learned letters, the Federalist Papers, and the Constitutional Conventions discussion of what should be proposed for the 2nd amendment the term 'game' appears only once and only from one state, Pennsylvania;

"That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own State, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil power."

And even in that instance the subject of hunting game takes a tertiary position. The balance of the proposed amendment reflects the true intent of the authors.

Going all the way back to Aristotle one of the foundation of Republicanism is the notion of the armed citizen, only slaves were to be unarmed. And the unarmed citizen is considered to be in a precarious position with regard to any sense of freedom in that they will always be at risk from the armed. Tyrants throughout history have understood this principle and have, as one of their first acts of power, gone about the disarming of the public. In virtually each and every case the reason given was for the purpose of domestic tranquility.

I find it no small surprise that the general coarsening of society, and the language in particular, coincides with the outlawing of dueling.

Ishmael

 

[Byron In Exile]

only slaves were to be unarmed.

Basically, Germans.

 

[Ishmael]

Basically, Germans.

Russian, Chinese, Brits, and Aussies are among that list. I'm waiting to see what happens in S. Africa after Mandella dies.

Ishmael

 

[koalabear]

Basically, Germans.

^^^^^^^^^post 223.