Author Topic: Looking for conservative clarification  (Read 3014 times)

Offline BILLY Defiant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4668
  • Gender: Male
  • In harms way of the furies at a reasonable price
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #90 on: January 21, 2013, 03:18:14 PM »


1. The Taliban is doing pretty good against us how exactly?

2. Huh?

3. Profit.

I was kidding about wanting to understand your culture.  I do however appreciate real debate and argument.

Have we "beaten" the taliban? Look at the last ten years and there is your answer. They still control a portion of the countryside just like the Viet cong and NVA regulars I fought did.

Speaking of Vietnam What you had were local rebels armed with anything they could find including sharpened bamboo sticks.

Lets go back further and look at Hitlers Legions in the Warsaw Ghetto...a few UNTRAINED people armed with old rifle's fought then the most technically advanced army in the world to a stand still.

We can keep on going down through history and even our own...the American Indian, the Revolution etc and provide numerous examples

You have to realize that weapon superiority and professional soldiers
often do poorly against a truely dedicated person who is defending his/her home and personal rights.

Evil operates best when it is disguised for what it truly is.

Capt.Obvious

  • Guest
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #91 on: January 21, 2013, 03:33:49 PM »
Have we "beaten" the taliban? Look at the last ten years and there is your answer. They still control a portion of the countryside just like the Viet cong and NVA regulars I fought did.

Speaking of Vietnam What you had were local rebels armed with anything they could find including sharpened bamboo sticks.

Lets go back further and look at Hitlers Legions in the Warsaw Ghetto...a few UNTRAINED people armed with old rifle's fought then the most technically advanced army in the world to a stand still.

We can keep on going down through history and even our own...the American Indian, the Revolution etc and provide numerous examples

You have to realize that weapon superiority and professional soldiers
often do poorly against a truely dedicated person who is defending his/her home and personal rights.

Point taken about Vietnam, I believe our forces have learned it's lesson since then though. As for the Taliban, no, they'll never do appreciable damage to western civilization except in the form of the terror it will occasionally create. In that regard, they only have power over us in-so-much as we give them that power and fear them.

I've asked many times of several posters.  In what scenario do you envision enough Americans rising up in arms against their own government?  Only about half of us law abiding citizens even care to own a gun to begin with.

What's going to be the smoking gun?  What's going to push everyone over the edge?

« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 03:47:04 PM by Capt.Obvious »

Offline BILLY Defiant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4668
  • Gender: Male
  • In harms way of the furies at a reasonable price
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #92 on: January 21, 2013, 04:04:13 PM »
Point taken about Vietnam, I believe our forces have learned it's lesson since then though. As for the Taliban, no, they'll never do appreciable damage to western civilization except in the form of the terror it will occasionally create. In that regard, they only have power over us in-so-much as we give them that power and fear them.

I've asked many times of several posters.  In what scenario do you envision enough Americans rising up in arms against their own government?  Only about half of us law abiding citizens even care to own a gun to begin with.

What's going to be the smoking gun?  What's going to push everyone over the edge?


Being a student of history I know that revolts are not successful unless one has the backing of a portion of the military and the police.
You have a lot of police who will not go along with what the federal Govt says. Without belaboring the point look at the problems betwen the Feds and the Local law men in Arizona over immigration and listen to what a growing number of Sheriffs and local lawmen across the country are saying about gun laws and executive orders.

My guess is that any real problems will occur between federal law enforcement and local lawmen and go from there.

Other factors will be tied into it, I think the number one problem is going to be the economy, if our economy collapses, you are looking at major problems that no one can control.

Think about it, during the Chaos do you think all the military families, police familes, national guard famlies won't be caught up in it? Those are the guys who are expected to maintain order, do you think they will do that or look to their own familes?

Billy


 
Evil operates best when it is disguised for what it truly is.

Capt.Obvious

  • Guest
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #93 on: January 21, 2013, 04:12:02 PM »

Being a student of history I know that revolts are not successful unless one has the backing of a portion of the military and the police.
You have a lot of police who will not go along with what the federal Govt says. Without belaboring the point look at the problems betwen the Feds and the Local law men in Arizona over immigration and listen to what a growing number of Sheriffs and local lawmen across the country are saying about gun laws and executive orders.

My guess is that any real problems will occur between federal law enforcement and local lawmen and go from there.

Other factors will be tied into it, I think the number one problem is going to be the economy, if our economy collapses, you are looking at major problems that no one can control.

Think about it, during the Chaos do you think all the military families, police familes, national guard famlies won't be caught up in it? Those are the guys who are expected to maintain order, do you think they will do that or look to their own familes?

Billy

The national guard wrung their hands and said how much they hated to have to disarm New Orleans after Katrina, but they followed orders, like trained.

I have a suspicion we're only hearing from these sheriffs because their job is political, but when faced with all the problems of defying the feds, we'll see more compliance.  Banning all firearms is not on the table to begin with.  Just some modest regulation, just as we regulated the highway and other dangerous things.

I love in Washington state and since legalizing marijuana, we're bucking the feds authority on this matter. I don't have a problem with protest in favor of local legislation but this fear that all guns will be banned is unproductive.

Online Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34273
  • Gender: Male
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #94 on: January 21, 2013, 05:21:21 PM »
Someone asked for restrictions on  freedom of speech which these are.  May have mixed posters.
Again, SCOTUS stated they are not restrictions on the 1st Amendment, you do not have the right to libel someone, libel is already illegal, so the 1st doesn't apply.
I asked you to show me where an actual Federal law exists restricting freedom of speech, not state law.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Capt.Obvious

  • Guest
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #95 on: January 21, 2013, 05:26:44 PM »
Again, SCOTUS stated they are not restrictions on the 1st Amendment, you do not have the right to libel someone, libel is already illegal, so the 1st doesn't apply.
I asked you to show me where an actual Federal law exists restricting freedom of speech, not state law.

Those ARE restrictions on freedom of speech.

I'll spell it out.  You may not speak or write whatever you want because of these laws so your speech is in fact restricted. This has all been before the Scotus as a challenge to the 1st and failed.

Online Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34273
  • Gender: Male
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #96 on: January 21, 2013, 05:30:11 PM »
Those ARE restrictions on freedom of speech.

I'll spell it out.  You may not speak or write whatever you want because of these laws so your speech is in fact restricted. This has all been before the Scotus as a challenge to the 1st and failed.
Those were State court cases brought before SCOTUS, there is a huge difference.
SCOTUS also said they are not restrictions on freedom of speech.
I asked for an actual Federal law, not a State issue.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Capt.Obvious

  • Guest
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #97 on: January 21, 2013, 05:43:48 PM »
Those were State court cases brought before SCOTUS, there is a huge difference.
SCOTUS also said they are not restrictions on freedom of speech.
I asked for an actual Federal law, not a State issue.

Therefore there is regulation on our freedom to speak.  not sure how more easily that can be explained.

Offline raptor5618

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #98 on: January 21, 2013, 08:03:11 PM »
You can own a gun but you cannot shot someone with it just for the hell of it. So you win our right to own a gun has restrictions.  Time to move on.  Voting will resolve political problems.  Wow it must be nice to only see things as you want them to be.  Hitler got voted in, Mao did too I believe.  USSR used to have elections too.  Talk against that government and off to Siberia you go.  Cuba is doing great too.  Hard to find a better place to see very old cars in action.  So nice that they are preserving that nostalgic time.

I think Afghanistan is a perfect example that short of totally annihilating the entire population they will not be dominated by an outside force.  Viet Nam was another example but toss on the  absurd rules of war at that time well we all know how that ended.  The conclusion of this discussion is so obvious and well argued that I feel the dissent needs to find some entertainment after hitting the bong a few times.  Think such uninformed childishness is better done on sites like the Hill.  I really like informed discussion and probably more so when the points go counter to what I believe to be true.  I do not have the time to research every aspect of some of these very complex issues.  So I am never certain that my conclusion is correct and appreciate the opportunity to see an opposing view point on which I can assess my position.  However,  uninformed argument and a repetition of talking points is not worth the time to consider.  Thanks to those who provide thoughtful insight and to those who wish to just stir the pot well I hope you quickly grow tired of such a childish endeavor.
"An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity."

Capt.Obvious

  • Guest
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #99 on: January 21, 2013, 08:31:07 PM »
The freedom speak is not absolute is my point.  Why does the freedom to own a firearm need to be absolute too?

Offline redlom xof

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #100 on: January 22, 2013, 02:30:41 AM »
There is also the point that there already is restrictions on the second amendment. You obviously can't own an atom bomb or some chemical weapons. You also can't own other 'arms' that aren't as extreme as these two examples I'm sure, I just can't name them but someone else on this forum probably could.

Can you own a bazooka ?
"Christians are expected to pacify angry Muslims, Communist brats and homosexual radicals and Mexicans who convinced themselves that they own our land. That tells me the Christians are the better people among brutal and violent beasts."  Yawn - 15th May, 2013

Capt.Obvious

  • Guest
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #101 on: January 22, 2013, 02:43:39 AM »
There is also the point that there already is restrictions on the second amendment. You obviously can't own an atom bomb or some chemical weapons. You also can't own other 'arms' that aren't as extreme as these two examples I'm sure, I just can't name them but someone else on this forum probably could.

Can you own a bazooka ?

And back in the day, you could own a naval warship.  Bazooka's, atom bombs, chemical weapons, all regulated out of the hands of the average citizen. 

Why not continue with more sensible regulation, like limiting personal firearms to bolt action rifles for hunting?  Just a thought. 


Offline mdgiles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8008
  • Gender: Male
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #102 on: January 22, 2013, 06:17:42 AM »
Someone asked for restrictions on  freedom of speech which these are.  May have mixed posters.
Uh, no. That's along the lines of complaining that not being allowed to shoot people you don't like is a restriction on your 2nd Amendment rights. The Bill of Rights doesn't give you freedom to engage in criminal conduct.
Example.
Stand on your soap box, at your torch light meeting going on and on about how you hate "those people". You are well within your first amendment rights. However, when you point at the torches surrounding the meeting and start suggesting the group go over to where "those people" live, and burn it down; then you are engaging in incitement. The law has no right to prevent you from speaking, it does have a right to stop or punish you for engaging in action. The anti 2nd Amendment types want to prevent you from even owning a soapbox; saying that last week someone two states away used that soapbox to incite a crowd.
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

Offline JustKari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1911
  • Gender: Female
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #103 on: January 22, 2013, 06:25:52 AM »
And back in the day, you could own a naval warship.  Bazooka's, atom bombs, chemical weapons, all regulated out of the hands of the average citizen. 

Why not continue with more sensible regulation, like limiting personal firearms to bolt action rifles for hunting?  Just a thought.

Why don't we limit your transportation to bicycle?  Or maybe limit your knife length to 3"?  While we are at it, hammers need to be restricted to only 1 lb, because hammers kill people... No one should have enough alcoholic beverages in their house to get drunk, tired of the restriction on your freedom yet?  The Constitution and Bill if Rights limit government, not citizenry.

Offline The Stranger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 1141
  • Gender: Male
Re: Looking for conservative clarification
« Reply #104 on: January 22, 2013, 06:29:58 AM »
Point taken about Vietnam, I believe our forces have learned it's lesson since then though. As for the Taliban, no, they'll never do appreciable damage to western civilization except in the form of the terror it will occasionally create. In that regard, they only have power over us in-so-much as we give them that power and fear them.

We have spent billions on scanners, we have spent billions on making planes safer(more secure). You can't go into many large office or government building without being searched. Have you tried to get onto a military base lately. They have done a HUGE AMOUNT of damage and are winning more everyday.

I've asked many times of several posters.  In what scenario do you envision enough Americans rising up in arms against their own government?  Only about half of us law abiding citizens even care to own a gun to begin with.

What's going to be the smoking gun?  What's going to push everyone over the edge?
“Every man is like the company he keeps.”
"Show me your friends and I'll show you your Future"

 

Powered by EzPortal