|
-
09-21-2017, 02:29 PM #781
-
09-21-2017, 02:34 PM #782
-
09-21-2017, 02:35 PM #783
-
09-21-2017, 02:48 PM #784
To me, a cop pulling me over and says there's a bench warrant for me and to come with him and I go and he never draws his weapon, I don't construe that as violent enforcement. It always seems to come down to resisting arrest. But sure, I'll concede that any law will be enforced with the potential threat of violence if you don't comply, but that isn't the same thing, imo.
-
-
09-21-2017, 02:58 PM #785
It really is the same thing. The only difference is whether or not you're willing to comply. The overwhelming majority of Americans recognize speed limit laws as justified, so there is not a massive uprising to fight against them. Same thing with most other offenses you could think of, but ultimately an individual who decides that these laws are unjust, and who tries to resist correction, will have violence inflicted upon him.
So now that we have that out of the way, maybe you can start to understand further implications of law, of collective will and of the balance of power. You can I can probably both agree that speed limit laws are justified, and that we don't need to take to the streets to fight and abolish them. However, what would happen if the state tried to impose onto us an unconstitutional law? What if we were no longer permitted to criticize any elected official, and the punishment for doing so was to have our tongues ripped out? What if it was decided that surprise inspections of your home would take place? What if it was decided that police officers could pick you up and throw you in prison without telling you what your crime was or allowing you to stand trial?
These are all laws that the people would, in large part, react negatively to. We can either comply with them, or we can exercise violence to stop their implementation.
Are you still following me here, or do you have questions?
-
09-21-2017, 10:38 PM #786
We just had a difference between all laws enforced with explicit violence and all laws enforced with implicit violence. You seem to make no distinction between the two, and for your intents and purposes, I suppose it doesn't matter.
That said, your first post itt was that the 2nd Amendment was for citizens to protect against the tyranny of government, so I already know/knew where you're going with all this. I'll just say it again, good luck if you and 100 of your buddies with miniguns etc., think you'll have any luck against a tyrannical government in this age.
The question is, do you fight a tyrannical government knowing you're drawing short, or, like others itt, do you think the military will join forces with a small group of civilians instead of following the commander in chief?
-
09-21-2017, 10:44 PM #787
There really is no difference. "Comply or we will make you comply." All laws are ultimately enforced with violence, if you are not willing to comply. I'm surprised you even question this, and frankly I think you're frauding about having been SWAT.
Whether or not one side or the other would hypothetically win is irrelevant. This is a philosophical discussion: Do the people have the right to arm themselves, should they ever need to resist tyranny? The answer any true American would give is yes. The answer you would give is... a little more ambiguous. Maybe you can clear it up for us.
Servicemen are human beings, and the vast majority have a great deal of respect for the Constitution and the liberties it protects. Not only is it a bad argument to say that they would all act a certain way, but it's also irrelevant. The point, again, is that the people have a right to keep themselves armed should they need to fight tyranny. Victory is never a guarantee in any war, for either side.
-
09-21-2017, 11:34 PM #788
Well, everyone keeps going back to "if" you don't comply. Again, the threat of violence is implicit. No need to pick nits, as this is moot to the topic for your agenda (which is some state of affairs where, "I dgaf about your laws because they are unconstitutional").
Lol, I never said I was SWAT. I said I was trained by a firearms expert who trains LEO. You, or maybe someone else posted some pic of an Antifa guy, and I clarified it was a 14-year SWAT veteran who trained me how to use my firearm.
Despite Trump being president, I still have faith that one person cannot turn a US government against its people.
Yeah, but it's not 1861. No group of citizens, as righteous as they may be, stands a chance against the government. In any case, I have bigger battles than possible government oppression via unconstitutional methods. Maybe that makes me a terrible American, I'll let you decide, but I'm not too worried about it.
-
-
09-21-2017, 11:44 PM #789
You're the only one nitpicking here. There really is no argument about it, because at the end of the day every law that every one of us follows is ultimately enforced with violence. If you don't do what you are told, then somewhere down the line you're going to be detained or killed - it's that simple. Ideally our laws are just and nobody feels the need to revolt. Speed limits? Fine. Murder illegal? Fine. Rape illegal? Great. Can't burn down houses? Sounds good.
When the laws are not just, then it's time to fight violence with violence. Great Britain wanted us to be their bitch and they were prepared to violently enforce their will. We were also willing to violently oppose them, and we won. The Union and the Confederacy each had their own idea of how the US should operate, and they were both prepared to enforce their wills with violence. The Union won.
In case you hadn't noticed, Trump doesn't have the power to simply do anything he wants. Further, even if he did, he has at least been consistent with advocating policies that put American citizens first. If we ever do have to fight for our rights, it won't be because of a single person, and it certainly won't be because of Trump.
You're naive if you think we're past strife just because it's 2017. Further, whether or not you think it's likely is completely irrelevant. American citizens do have the right to arm themselves and protect their land against government tyranny. If you do not believe Americans should have this right, then yes, you are actually a terrible American.
-
09-22-2017, 12:06 AM #790
Okay.
Yes, I've noticed quite clearly that the other two branches of government has prevented Trump from his utopian paradise. I guess those Founding Fathers were onto something.
Past strife...? No, certainly no; we are in it right now. Yes, Americans have the right to defend themselves against an unconstitutional fascist government. No, your little weapons will not do jack chit against it - you already gave up that power long ago. Just the facts, but you can try.
-
09-22-2017, 12:08 AM #791
-
09-22-2017, 12:38 AM #792
-
-
09-22-2017, 12:48 AM #793
-
09-22-2017, 01:29 AM #794
This is why people take issue with attempting to have mature discourse on this topic: "Herp derp, make homosexuality illegal... get it? Haha... see how people will choose to do illegal stuff no matter what the cause? Herp derp..."
Your posts were much more civil and mature when you thought I was a "confused" SWAT officer, lol.
-
09-22-2017, 02:00 AM #795
That wasn't a serious suggestion, and I have already given my actual opinion on the night club issue. We understand that some people are going to be shot if we have firearms, and that is a price we are willing to pay for our freedoms. Similarly, people are going to die in car accidents as long as we are free to own and operate motor vehicles. People are going to develop diabetes as long as we have the freedom to choose to overeat. And so on, and so forth.
Of course, we can reduce the number of deadly attacks with smarter immigration policies.
-
09-22-2017, 06:15 AM #796
-
-
09-22-2017, 07:26 AM #797
-
09-22-2017, 07:34 AM #798
-
09-22-2017, 07:42 AM #799
-
10-02-2017, 09:47 AM #800
-
-
10-02-2017, 09:48 AM #801
-
10-02-2017, 09:52 AM #802
-
10-02-2017, 10:10 AM #803
Standing on the graves of people who were killed less than 24 hours ago to one-up someone on the internet. Absolutely disgusting.
As I have said a number of times in this thread already, firearm casualties are part of the price we pay for the freedom we cherish. If that doesn't sit well with you, move to a less free country like Australia.
-
10-02-2017, 10:12 AM #804
-
-
10-02-2017, 10:16 AM #805
-
10-02-2017, 10:17 AM #806
-
10-02-2017, 10:19 AM #807
-
10-02-2017, 10:30 AM #808
-
-
10-02-2017, 11:24 AM #809
-
10-02-2017, 11:49 AM #810
Bookmarks