Lurch
Member Profile
Member Since: 2007-03-03
Last Power Points used: 2008-09-05 • Available: now
Max Power Points: 1
Comments
You make good points, Lurch, and I hope you're right.

My original comment (the "which is worse" thing) was less about supporting a ban/tax and more about asking the OP where he stands: subverting the constitution, about which Bush feels he is beyond reproach, or legislating a ban or tax on guns, thus keeping it civil, legal, and most importantly allowing for it to be blocked, civilly and legally. It's a false choice, yes, but then...so is our presidential election. I'm kidding. Sort of.

Jokes aside, watching those vids of New Orleans cops taking guns away from citizens kind of made me want to get a gun. Is that bad?

In reply to this comment by Lurch:
Yeah, I've thought about that before and I wouldn't call it meaningless. I think if you are talking on a national scale (which is highly fictional), the element of surprise used on Katrina victims would be gone after the first round of confiscations. Also, the amount of force the federal government would have to employ with fully complicit local agencies of all types to perform a nationwide confiscation is a serious deterrant to it ever happening. The risks and problems outweigh any rewards. Once it was known that weapons were being taken, you can bet the general reaction would be much more violent than during Katrina. It would be far easier and more realistic to achieve the same goals by slowly erroding gun rights over time and pushing for legal means to disarm.

Also, I don't see why someone who fears that the government *could* take weapons by force if they wanted to would think it was logical to support bans and unreasonable restrictions. I'm not saying you in particular since you didn't really mention specifics on your position, but it's something I've noticed having this conversation with others. It just seems incongruous to me since this argument of "you couldn't fight back anyway" comes up a lot. To me it is like saying, "I don't think I could stop them from illegally taking my guns if they wanted to, so I'll support laws that make it legal for them to do so." I think if private firearms are going to be taken en masse in this country it will be through slow and calculated legislation "for our own protection," not by force.

In reply to this comment by shuac:
Well, I'm glad for that. And while I'm normally anti-gun and having never once held a gun in all my 40 years, I watched all the footage of the Sheriffs taking people's guns away in sheer horror. The NRA had the chance to litigate this issue afterward only because the worst had not happened.

But imagine for a moment (taking the founding fathers' original intentions of the 2nd amendment and applying them to today's world, something I never thought we'd have to do), that if the time ever comes that we'd need an armed populace for the purpose of defending the Constitution, a job normally done by our elected officials...then the government has proven that all they need to do to prevent that from happening is to merely walk up to that armed populace and literally take their guns away.

It took a hurricane to demonstrate to the powers that be that the 2nd amendment is meaningless. After the "big moment" has passed us by and the population has been disarmed, there will be no court date.

Again, I'm normally anti-NRA so you can imagine my disappointment.

In reply to this comment by Lurch:
>> ^shuac:
Which is worse: 1) making an attempt to legislate a ban/tax on firearms of these kinds which puts it up to be legitimately 'shot down' (hehe) or 2) proclaiming yourself pro-NRA and having your police force take citizens' guns away anyway...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgPR9I4KMNI

Seriously. I'm asking. Which is worse?


Well, the NRA actually took that to court and got all the firearms returned. They're also currently fighting in DC over making sure the government follows through after the ban was overturned. So, in the end, the NRA still prevailed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081008/ap_on_re_us/katrina_confiscated_guns
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27087738/


written by shuac  | 3 hours 26 minutes 29 seconds ago | CH
▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)
Well, I'm glad for that. And while I'm normally anti-gun and having never once held a gun in all my 40 years, I watched all the footage of the Sheriffs taking people's guns away in sheer horror. The NRA had the chance to litigate this issue afterward only because the worst had not happened.

But imagine for a moment (taking the founding fathers' original intentions of the 2nd amendment and applying them to today's world, something I never thought we'd have to do), that if the time ever comes that we'd need an armed populace for the purpose of defending the Constitution, a job normally done by our elected officials...then the government has proven that all they need to do to prevent that from happening is to merely walk up to that armed populace and literally take their guns away.

It took a hurricane to demonstrate to the powers that be that the 2nd amendment is meaningless. After the "big moment" has passed us by and the population has been disarmed, there will be no court date.

Again, I'm normally anti-NRA so you can imagine my disappointment.

In reply to this comment by Lurch:
>> ^shuac:
Which is worse: 1) making an attempt to legislate a ban/tax on firearms of these kinds which puts it up to be legitimately 'shot down' (hehe) or 2) proclaiming yourself pro-NRA and having your police force take citizens' guns away anyway...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgPR9I4KMNI

Seriously. I'm asking. Which is worse?


Well, the NRA actually took that to court and got all the firearms returned. They're also currently fighting in DC over making sure the government follows through after the ban was overturned. So, in the end, the NRA still prevailed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081008/ap_on_re_us/katrina_confiscated_guns
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27087738/


written by shuac  | 6 hours 53 minutes 2 seconds ago | CH
▲ 2 ▼ | flag spam (0)
You know, I don't remember. But I used your code. Thanks.


In reply to this comment by Lurch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtPvR10E0_k

Is this the same clip as the dead one? I didn't want to just fix it with the wrong trailer.

In reply to this comment by ant:
Can't find a replacement.


written by ant  | 22 hours 28 minutes 5 seconds ago | CH
▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)
we were on gchat at the time and decided it was an awesome clip. then somehow we both decided to promote it without saying so.

we are actually just one person in two bodies.


In reply to this comment by Lurch:
Thanks for the promote. It's hilarious that you and Farhad both promoted it barely a minute apart from each other.

In reply to this comment by MINK:
*promote


written by MINK  | 3 days 15 hours 52 minutes ago | CH
▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)
Submit Comment
log in or register to submit new comment


1
Text Advertisements

Technics DJ-Equipment

Forex MetaTrader Indicator

Nouveau Riche University

Advertise Here
Airline Revenue Accounting
Yuarel.com - Create Custom URLs