Current Events > The only right that guns defend is the right to own guns

Topic List	Page List: 1
Accolon 06/27/22 9:52:36 AM #1:	That's it. --- http://i.imgur.com/XAMp8.jpg <cite>Accolon posted [p:966143511] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>That's it. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
NeoShadowhen 06/27/22 10:08:54 AM #2:	You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves? <cite>NeoShadowhen posted [p:966143835] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LightHawKnight 06/27/22 10:11:49 AM #3:	NeoShadowhen posted... You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves? No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to. --- The Official Odin of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board. "You know how confusing the whole good-evil concept is for me." <cite>LightHawKnight posted [p:966143887] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>NeoShadowhen posted... </cite> <quote>You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves?</quote> No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Accolon 06/27/22 10:15:25 AM #4:	NeoShadowhen posted... You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves? Not when the ones with the guns are backing the authoritarians. --- http://i.imgur.com/XAMp8.jpg <cite>Accolon posted [p:966143961] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>NeoShadowhen posted... </cite> <quote>You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves?</quote> Not when the ones with the guns are backing the authoritarians. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Baha05 06/27/22 10:18:09 AM #5:	LightHawKnight posted... No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to. Pretty much this, it might have been something you could have done when guns took a minute or so to reload and shoot one round slug but these days it would be impractical if not impossible for most average citizens to beat the US Army (Not to mention you now got more then just the army) --- "He may be Mr. Clean, but his soul will always be dirty!" <cite>Baha05 posted [p:966144015] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>LightHawKnight posted... </cite> <quote>No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to.</quote>Pretty much this, it might have been something you could have done when guns took a minute or so to reload and shoot one round slug but these days it would be impractical if not impossible for most average citizens to beat the US Army (Not to mention you now got more then just the army) </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
What_ 06/27/22 10:19:20 AM #6:	Accolon posted... Not when the ones with the guns are backing the authoritarians. <cite>What_ posted [p:966144049] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Accolon posted... </cite> <quote>Not when the ones with the guns are backing the authoritarians.</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_HayleyWilliams 06/27/22 10:21:58 AM #7:	NeoShadowhen posted... You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves? The same people that want to arm everyone are the ones most eager to strip rights from the population --- hockeybub89 <cite>_HayleyWilliams posted [p:966144090] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>NeoShadowhen posted... </cite> <quote>You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves?</quote>The same people that want to arm everyone are the ones most eager to strip rights from the population </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 06/27/22 11:08:00 AM #8:	LightHawKnight posted... No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to. meanwhile, in Vietnam... <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:966145072] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>LightHawKnight posted... </cite> <quote>No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to.</quote>meanwhile, in Vietnam... </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Accolon 06/27/22 11:15:12 AM #9:	I don't know. Millions of women just lost their right to bodily autonomy, I don't see no armed uprising. The Supreme Court so said they're coming for LGBT rights next. I don't see no well regulated militias in the streets. In fact, the only violent insurrection I know of recently was to overthrow a legal, free, and fair presidential election. I only hear these gun folks talking about how if "they" come for their guns, it'll be a civil war. --- http://i.imgur.com/XAMp8.jpg <cite>Accolon posted [p:966145241] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>I don't know. Millions of women just lost their right to bodily autonomy, I don't see no armed uprising. The Supreme Court so said they're coming for LGBT rights next. I don't see no well regulated militias in the streets. In fact, the only violent insurrection I know of recently was to overthrow a legal, free, and fair presidential election. I only hear these gun folks talking about how if "they" come for their guns, it'll be a civil war. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sackgurl 06/27/22 11:25:00 AM #10:	NeoShadowhen posted... You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves? current evidence suggests that no, republicans are not hesitant to infringe on the rights of expression (1st), voting (24th), privacy (9th), equal protection (14th) despite the population being armed because although armed, a large fraction of the population (NOT a majority) is also thoroughly indoctrinated and our representation system has enabled that minority to strip rights from the majority --- LittleBigPlanet is like merging dress-up with a real game. <cite>Sackgurl posted [p:966145438] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>NeoShadowhen posted... </cite> <quote>You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves?</quote> current evidence suggests that no, republicans are not hesitant to infringe on the rights of expression (1st), voting (24th), privacy (9th), equal protection (14th) despite the population being armed because although armed, a large fraction of the population (NOT a majority) is also thoroughly indoctrinated and our representation system has enabled that minority to strip rights from the majority </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkBuster22904 06/27/22 11:26:54 AM #11:	NeoShadowhen posted... You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves? When that government has access to an air force, navy, marine corps, drone strikes, nuclear weapons, and trillions of dollars in funding? Vs an army of disorganized and overconfident beer swilling rednecks and armchair quarterbacks with their semi auto rifles? No. I don't think they'd be any more hesitant, whatsoever. --- Haven't had a good sig idea since 2006 <cite>DarkBuster22904 posted [p:966145491] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>NeoShadowhen posted... </cite> <quote>You believe that people who are in power would not be more hesitant to infringe on the rights of an armed population as opposed to a population who has no means to defend themselves?</quote>When that government has access to an air force, navy, marine corps, drone strikes, nuclear weapons, and trillions of dollars in funding? Vs an army of disorganized and overconfident beer swilling rednecks and armchair quarterbacks with their semi auto rifles? No. I don't think they'd be any more hesitant, whatsoever. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sackgurl 06/27/22 11:27:25 AM #12:	Questionmarktarius posted... meanwhile, in Vietnam... in vietnam the vietcong failed to achieve every single strategic objective they ever sought to accomplish, and three million vietnamese (including two million civilians and one million vietcong/NVA troops) died i don't think that analogue really works here --- LittleBigPlanet is like merging dress-up with a real game. <cite>Sackgurl posted [p:966145508] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Questionmarktarius posted... </cite> <quote>meanwhile, in Vietnam...</quote>in vietnam the vietcong failed to achieve every single strategic objective they ever sought to accomplish, and three million vietnamese (including two million civilians and one million vietcong/NVA troops) died i don't think that analogue really works here </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 06/27/22 11:30:29 AM #13:	Sackgurl posted... i don't think that analogue really works here Afghanistan then, twice. You don't need a decisive victory, you just have to annoy the military until they go home. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:966145571] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Sackgurl posted... </cite> <quote>i don't think that analogue really works here</quote>Afghanistan then, twice. You don't need a decisive victory, you just have to annoy the military until they go home. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sackgurl 06/27/22 11:36:21 AM #14:	Questionmarktarius posted... Afghanistan then, twice. You don't need a decisive victory, you just have to annoy the military until they go home. but this is home --- LittleBigPlanet is like merging dress-up with a real game. <cite>Sackgurl posted [p:966145697] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Questionmarktarius posted... </cite> <quote>Afghanistan then, twice. You don't need a decisive victory, you just have to annoy the military until they go home.</quote>but this is home </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Hop103 06/27/22 11:36:33 AM #15:	Guns also keep potential dictators away as well, it keeps things establishment and center like it should be, I don't want a legit beyond a shadow of a doubt socialist or neo-nazi dictator running the country. --- "In the name of the future moon I shall punish you"-Chibi Moon <cite>Hop103 posted [p:966145702] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Guns also keep potential dictators away as well, it keeps things establishment and center like it should be, I don't want a legit beyond a shadow of a doubt socialist or neo-nazi dictator running the country.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dark_Spiret 06/27/22 11:37:34 AM #16:	Accolon posted... I don't know. Millions of women just lost their right to bodily autonomy, I don't see no armed uprising. The Supreme Court so said they're coming for LGBT rights next. I don't see no well regulated militias in the streets. why dont the left do something about it then? people seem to think the 2nd amendment is only for the right leaning. it isnt. maybe something could change if you actually had 10,000 heavily armed democrats/leftists march on the capital. <cite>Dark_Spiret posted [p:966145726] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Accolon posted... </cite> <quote>I don't know. Millions of women just lost their right to bodily autonomy, I don't see no armed uprising. The Supreme Court so said they're coming for LGBT rights next. I don't see no well regulated militias in the streets.</quote>why dont the left do something about it then? people seem to think the 2nd amendment is only for the right leaning. it isnt. maybe something could change if you actually had 10,000 heavily armed democrats/leftists march on the capital. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkBuster22904 06/27/22 11:40:39 AM #17:	Dark_Spiret posted... why dont the left do something about it then? people seem to think the 2nd amendment is only for the right leaning. it isnt. maybe something could change if you actually had 10,000 heavily armed democrats/leftists march on the capital. Yeah, the military would massacre them as soon as one politician actually got hurt. --- Haven't had a good sig idea since 2006 <cite>DarkBuster22904 posted [p:966145800] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Dark_Spiret posted... </cite> <quote>why dont the left do something about it then? people seem to think the 2nd amendment is only for the right leaning. it isnt. maybe something could change if you actually had 10,000 heavily armed democrats/leftists march on the capital.</quote>Yeah, the military would massacre them as soon as one politician actually got hurt. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dark_Spiret 06/27/22 12:08:34 PM #18:	DarkBuster22904 posted... Yeah, the military would massacre them as soon as one politician actually got hurt. thats not reality. could they? yes. would they? no. there would be too many eyes on them in this day and age to be able to get away with that. everyone in the country, the world and within our own military would be watching. even if you dont agree with others, watching an A10 straff thousands of US citizens on their own soil isnt going to get any real support from anyone which you WILL need to stay into power. the poeple who make the laws are still flesh and blood. those who drive the tanks, fly the jets and control the drones. people who still have familys and still need a place to sleep. everyone within the system would have a target on their back for a population that has more guns than people. it would be chaos. <cite>Dark_Spiret posted [p:966146510] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>DarkBuster22904 posted... </cite> <quote>Yeah, the military would massacre them as soon as one politician actually got hurt.</quote>thats not reality. could they? yes. would they? no. there would be too many eyes on them in this day and age to be able to get away with that. everyone in the country, the world and within our own military would be watching. even if you dont agree with others, watching an A10 straff thousands of US citizens on their own soil isnt going to get any real support from anyone which you WILL need to stay into power. the poeple who make the laws are still flesh and blood. those who drive the tanks, fly the jets and control the drones. people who still have familys and still need a place to sleep. everyone within the system would have a target on their back for a population that has more guns than people. it would be chaos. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Pepys Monster 06/27/22 12:13:20 PM #19:	LightHawKnight posted... No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to. Just like when the United States steamrolled Afghanistan and Vietnam? --- Ryzen 3700X \| Evga GTX 1070 Ti \| 16GB DDR4 3200 \| Crucial MX500 2TB <cite>Pepys Monster posted [p:966146647] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>LightHawKnight posted... </cite> <quote>No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to.</quote>Just like when the United States steamrolled Afghanistan and Vietnam? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Baha05 06/27/22 12:17:02 PM #20:	Pepys Monster posted... Just like when the United States steamrolled Afghanistan and Vietnam? Big difference between Guerrilla warfare versus what your average citizen will do. I dont think most people arguing for gun rights in case the government needs to be taken down are going to be Rambo --- "He may be Mr. Clean, but his soul will always be dirty!" <cite>Baha05 posted [p:966146730] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Pepys Monster posted... </cite> <quote>Just like when the United States steamrolled Afghanistan and Vietnam?</quote>Big difference between Guerrilla warfare versus what your average citizen will do. I dont think most people arguing for gun rights in case the government needs to be taken down are going to be Rambo </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Pepys Monster 06/27/22 12:25:19 PM #21:	Baha05 posted... Big difference between Guerrilla warfare versus what your average citizen will do. I dont think most people arguing for gun rights in case the government needs to be taken down are going to be Rambo You wouldn't have to be Rambo. I'd hate to be enlisted and go on patrols on US soil fighting campers and snipers. --- Ryzen 3700X \| Evga GTX 1070 Ti \| 16GB DDR4 3200 \| Crucial MX500 2TB <cite>Pepys Monster posted [p:966146913] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>Baha05 posted... </cite> <quote>Big difference between Guerrilla warfare versus what your average citizen will do. I dont think most people arguing for gun rights in case the government needs to be taken down are going to be Rambo</quote>You wouldn't have to be Rambo. I'd hate to be enlisted and go on patrols on US soil fighting campers and snipers. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Son Of Spam 06/27/22 12:30:45 PM #22:	LightHawKnight posted... No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to. The military would undoubtedly have the advantage, but they would have some limitations using their technology on their own people. You start dropping bombs on your own soil you destroy the very infrastructure that fuels your military. The other thing is if things got this bad in the US the military would likely be splintered. It probably wouldn't be the citizens vs the military. It would be citizens plus some parts of the military vs other citizens and parts of the military. --- 17 years on Gamefaqs, and I still don't have a signature. <cite>Son Of Spam posted [p:966147049] in The only r... [t:80072983]...</cite> <quote>LightHawKnight posted... </cite> <quote>No matter how many guns a redneck community has, the military will still steamroll through them if they wanted to.</quote>The military would undoubtedly have the advantage, but they would have some limitations using their technology on their own people. You start dropping bombs on your own soil you destroy the very infrastructure that fuels your military. The other thing is if things got this bad in the US the military would likely be splintered. It probably wouldn't be the citizens vs the military. It would be citizens plus some parts of the military vs other citizens and parts of the military. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1

Current Events > The only right that guns defend is the right to own guns (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > The only right that guns defend is the right to own guns