Thread: Ultimate Test of Civility ~ 2nd Amendment

Bill I agree that the Arabs must be stopped, unfortunately my best ideas either involved nuclear weapons or chemical castration...so Im not the best person to ask. My idea for our border crossing problems is a shoot to kill policy whether it be through automated means or heavily armed men, most people get angry over that stance. Clearly I dont have all the answers, but I guess no one does.

However, regardless of my ideals or anyone elses, I fail to see how taking away our rights as citizens to heavy firepower solves anything at all.

This whole issue of the ugly american cracks me up

Excuse me if the next few statments sound a little overly nationlistic or over the top:

We as the wolds most powerful nation have behaved far more civily than any superpower in the history of man.

The Greeks tried to take over the known world. The Romans tried to take over the world. The Catholic church took over all of Europe and tried to spread further only to be stopped by the Arabs. The French also conqured till they were stopped and the English when it was there turn oppressed native peoples the world over untill their empire fell. Now its our turn.

We could have kept and ruled half of Europe as the Russians did as well as kept part of Asia after WWII yet we passed. We could be ruling Afganistan right now, we could be lording it over Iraq ruling with an oppressive fist yet we keep trying to build up their govt and come home without leaving too big a mess. Sill as you say we are hated the world over for our arrogance.

We might as well just go out and have a nice little conquering spree the world couldn't hate us any more.

"what are we going to do tonite Brain"
"the same thing we do every night Pinky, Try to take over the world"

Originally Posted by Wildtim

This whole issue of the ugly american cracks me up

Excuse me if the next few statments sound a little overly nationlistic or over the top:

We as the wolds most powerful nation have behaved far more civily than any superpower in the history of man.

The Greeks tried to take over the known world. The Romans tried to take over the world. The Catholic church took over all of Europe and tried to spread further only to be stopped by the Arabs. The French also conqured till they were stopped and the English when it was there turn oppressed native peoples the world over untill their empire fell. Now its our turn.

We could have kept and ruled half of Europe as the Russians did as well as kept part of Asia after WWII yet we passed. We could be ruling Afganistan right now, we could be lording it over Iraq ruling with an oppressive fist yet we keep trying to build up their govt and come home without leaving too big a mess. Sill as you say we are hated the world over for our arrogance.

We might as well just go out and have a nice little conquering spree the world couldn't hate us any more.

"what are we going to do tonite Brain"
"the same thing we do every night Pinky, Try to take over the world"

Do you think we could make france our new nuclear test ground, Nevada is so pretty afer all???

Originally Posted by JLStorm

My idea for our border crossing problems is a shoot to kill policy whether it be through automated means or heavily armed men, most people get angry over that stance.

I like that idea, my plan was to sell hunting Licenses but that tends to go over at partys like a lead baloon.

Originally Posted by JLStorm

Bill I agree that the Arabs must be stopped, unfortunately my best ideas either involved nuclear weapons or chemical castration...so Im not the best person to ask. My idea for our border crossing problems is a shoot to kill policy whether it be through automated means or heavily armed men, most people get angry over that stance. Clearly I dont have all the answers, but I guess no one does.

I humbly submit that when we start talking about nuclear annihilation or chemical castration of an entire ethnic group, we fail a bigger test of civility than the one this thread was supposed to be about.

Originally Posted by dylandog

I humbly submit that when we start talking about nuclear annihilation or chemical castration of an entire ethnic group, we fail a bigger test of civility than the one this thread was supposed to be about.

They are a cancer of the human race that believes in exterminating anyone who exists along with them, even if we want to leave them alone and have nothing to do with them. They are cowards who dont care to spare the lives of those who wish not to fight against them, I say screw them, end them, eliminate them in their entirety. They breed like rats as well. As I mentioned my suggestion isnt the perfect answer, but its the only thing I can think of that works.

So, there isn’t an absolute constitutional right to own and carry weapons.

This, I don't agree with. And I wish the NRA, or somebody, would force the issue to the Supreme court to end all the argumentation. I don't even know if that is possible, but that is what I would like to see.

I think guns should be licensed like driving, and there should be different licenses for different types of weapons. There should be a competency test, a psychological test, and a background check.

I cannot disagree with this statement. In fact, I think it would be a good idea. Except... I also think it would be argued that a driver's license is a privilege and not a right, as is the right to keep and bear arms. I don't have a problem with licencing, myself, however.

If it could be regulated, then I might also suggest the first amendment be altered to say that the media be schooled in the difference between the truth and fabricating it, with a felony being issued for each lie. Either side must tell the truth. I just want the truth, period.

If there were, no government could regulate them. So, that’s not a really persuasive argument

I think that would only be true if the previous string of deductive statements were true and accurate, thus leading to an equally accurately conclusion. I think that's where the disagreements come from. I, personally, don't agree with the previous reasoning that led to your conclusion.

We need some laws placing liability on dealers whose weapons consistently turn up in the wrong hands

I could go for that as long as it could be proven that the transfer of weapons to criminals or other unlawful ownership could be proven. Not if someone just robbed the store.

Carrying an unlicensed, concealed weapon should be a felony

OK, but I think that should be qualified. Since I believe just about everyone should be allowed to carry a gun, I think penalties should be directed to those not allowed to have guns in the first place. Those would be the felons, illegals, and the mentally unstable. I don't think the gun should be licensed, but I think it is OK to license the person. In other words, It's OK for this or that person to have a gun, but the government doesn't get the serial number to their gun. The bottom line for me it that everyone should be held strictly accountable for the use of the gun.

It seems like you're equating Afghanis with Arabs

My bad. I was trying to reference any muslim who thinks that anyone who is not muslim should die. Y'see, they wouldn't want to stop the killing with Americans... they want you too. Pardon the inaccurate blanket statement.

you can't just start attacking Islamic nations just because one terrorist group successfully executed an attrocious operation.

In theory, I would agree. But if these Islamic nations are willingly harboring those who do the harm, they are just as bad and just as responsible.

What's to stop any country from saying, "Oh, it's not us, it's that group of fundamentalists in the mountains over there", knowing they disavow the connection to escape retaliation. And they just might be hiding them specifically to terrorize the country of their choice at the time.

...a Tomahawk hitting a hospital (with no military objectives in the vicinity) where my great aunt was staying, thus killing her.

I don't think there is an American alive who wants these things to happen.

The violence has to stop somewhere.

Tell that to the muslim extremists.

Insulting the US foreign policies with facts and logic is the only thing I can do...

That's just it... I don't think you have the complete facts other than what you want them to be to justify your logic. If the facts are flawed, so too is the logic. Insinuating we went to Vietnam to give the poor farmers cancer is flawed logic as I see it.

Setting political preferences aside, I have to say I do not like politicians in general. Any of them. I just dislike some of them more than others.

Josh, I really hope that you're kidding on this topic. Even though a large percentage of my fellow Serbs will agree with you (half a millenium of Turkish occupation will encourage such sentiments), you're starting to sound like Hitler. He was saying the very same thing (speaking of end-results, not the techniques) about another Semitic tribe -- the Jews. Usually these homicidal tendencies come out of ignorance. My mother and uncle grew up in Northern Africa (Algeria and Morocco), got to know the culture and passed on their respect for it to me.
In addition to that, I spent a year with a Libyan roommate who brought his other Libyan friends over. I got along with all of them just fine even though they are Muslims of Arabic origins and I'm a Christian Serb. Even when they'd invite me to a communal meal, they'd modify their customs to allow for my Western sensibilities.
Just because a group of brain-washed fanatics committed an unspeakable act of violence, doesn't mean that a whole ethnic group should be exterminated. The Germans killed millions a few decades ago, with nation-wide participation and they're a valued member of the international community now.

Originally Posted by FiReSTaRT

Josh, I really hope that you're kidding on this topic. Even though a large percentage of my fellow Serbs will agree with you (half a millenium of Turkish occupation will encourage such sentiments), you're starting to sound like Hitler. He was saying the very same thing (speaking of end-results, not the techniques) about another Semitic tribe -- the Jews. Usually these homicidal tendencies come out of ignorance. My mother and uncle grew up in Northern Africa (Algeria and Morocco), got to know the culture and passed on their respect for it to me.
In addition to that, I spent a year with a Libyan roommate who brought his other Libyan friends over. I got along with all of them just fine even though they are Muslims of Arabic origins and I'm a Christian Serb. Even when they'd invite me to a communal meal, they'd modify their customs to allow for my Western sensibilities.
Just because a group of brain-washed fanatics committed an unspeakable act of violence, doesn't mean that a whole ethnic group should be exterminated. The Germans killed millions a few decades ago, with nation-wide participation and they're a valued member of the international community now.

Im not kidding, but I also know it isnt a good answer. The problem is that the countries that the extremists live in happily hide them, so other than punis the entire country Idont see an answer. It isnt like hitler simply because if someone wants to practice the religion and has no intent to harm anyone by doing it, I say go for it. However when someone decides for religious reasons or otherwise they want to join a group that does harm to others I think they should be executed. I also think that those who harbor their kind should suffer the same consiquences.

The difference between the muslim extrimests and the jews is that the jews had no interest in anything but living peacefully. These people want to destroy anyone who isnt like them, just like hitler did. I believe that a full truce needs to be invoked, and upon violating the truce (which they will) they need to be hunted down and terminated with extreme prejudice, along with anyone having any part in supporting them.

My bad. I was trying to reference any muslim who thinks that anyone who is not muslim should die. Y'see, they wouldn't want to stop the killing with Americans... they want you too. Pardon the inaccurate blanket statement.

Just making another correction: Most muslims don't want to kill Americans or anyone else for that matter. They want the same thing as most US citizens do, to live peacefuly. Some regimes are more tolerant than others, but no regime can completely stop religious extremists who advocate violence. In the US you have greater resources so you can keep a check on domestic terrorists than a poor Middle-Eastern nation.

In theory, I would agree. But if these Islamic nations are willingly harboring those who do the harm, they are just as bad and just as responsible.

I agree with you on this point and that's why I didn't shed any tears over the military action in Afghanistan. However, I was glad that the Liberals were in power when the US decided to re-invade Iraq.

I don't think there is an American alive who wants these things to happen.

That's just it... I don't think you have the complete facts other than what you want them to be to justify your logic. If the facts are flawed, so too is the logic. Insinuating we went to Vietnam to give the poor farmers cancer is flawed logic as I see it.

I am not saying that your average US citizen would want to do this stuff to innocent people. However these incidents prove that your governments have historically allowed your armed forces to use some fairly attrocious means to achieve their ends. Even though I went to protest against Milosevic while I was still living in Serbia, I was still outraged when with all your talk about freedom of speech, the administration sanctioned bombings of TV transmitters and stations because they were spreading Milosevic's messages and there wasn't a nation-wide backlash over it.
You can see why I have issues with the US foreign policies, even though I have to admit it's mostly with the "Democrats."