• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 19:10
CEST 01:10
KST 08:10
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202530RSL Season 1 - Final Week8[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams1Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster Why doesnt SC2 scene costream tournaments
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL Corsair Pursuit Micro?
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET The Casual Games of the Week Thread BWCL Season 63 Announcement
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 632 users

If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 372 373 374 375 376 891 Next
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action.
DisneylandSC
Profile Joined November 2010
Netherlands435 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-21 22:40:18
January 21 2013 22:39 GMT
#7461
My opinion is that in an ideal civilization the police and armed forces should have a monopoly on firearms and other type of weapons. Sadly there are very few countries that are even close to ideal.

When the police is doing it's job and crime is low the "spur of the moment murder made easier / possible by guns" argument outweighs that of the "criminals have guns anyway" argument. In a society where the police / goverment / justice system fails I would support the right for citizens to bear arms. What the government often forgets is that by issuing a monopoly on violence they also take the responibility upon themselves to protect its citizens.
Zahir
Profile Joined March 2012
United States947 Posts
January 21 2013 23:40 GMT
#7462
Im enjoying that argument about an armed populace helping to ward off the predations of a tyrannical government. Probably because I like envisioning apocalyptic, all hell breaks loose scenarios. You don't need to think of it in terms of an outright coup either. Armed citizen Militias played a role not only in the American revolution, but also the civil war and the labor upheavals of the industrial period (a mere 100 years ago!!!!!!!) and even during the civil rights struggles and black liberation movements of the 60s (though there, armed citizens groups had an influence that was largely negative and at odds with the goals of the nonviolent movement embodied in such figures as mlk). Point is, had citizens been largely unarmed at any of those points in history, we could be looking at a very different world today.

So yeah, I don't buy that argument that "if a tyrannical government took over then assault rifles would be meaningless anyway". Not every tyrannical coup enjoys the benefit absolute, Stalinesque control over the military and bureaucracy. I mean, sometimes the government isn't even the chief antagonist, but simply lets some other favored group (corporations in the early 1900s, later the kkk) massacre and devastate segments of the population in order to protect the rights of whites or investors or some such justification.

Given the ongoing corporatization of and popular dissatisfaction with the government, radicalization of political parties and segments of the populace (ows and the tea party come to mind), and recent economic crises, I would not be so quick to assume the days of gun ownership having a significant impact on us politics and society are over.
What is best? To crush the Zerg, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the Protoss.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
January 21 2013 23:43 GMT
#7463
On January 22 2013 08:40 Zahir wrote:
I would not be so quick to assume the days of gun ownership having a significant impact on us politics and society are over.


Yes, but it's to the benefit of the tyrants
shikata ga nai
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42640 Posts
January 21 2013 23:48 GMT
#7464
If gun owners, and implicitly the threat of killing those they disagree with, are presently having an impact on the democratic process then that is what we who believe in democracy would define as a problem. That's not really a defence of gun ownership to oppose the government, that's a really big reason to disarm them in the name of freedom.

Also someone earlier made the point that Jefferson made it unequivocally clear that the right to bear arms was to act as a functional counterbalance to the army, both domestic and foreign. That battle was lost with the development of a modern, mechanised military in the World Wars, a militia couldn't keep pace with the changing nature of the battlefield. But if you're a constitutional purist then stop talking about hunting and self defence and start demanding the right to own tanks, helicopter gunships and all the rest of it. That's what the constitution was talking about. Or you could just not be a constitutional purist.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Sermokala
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States13924 Posts
January 21 2013 23:59 GMT
#7465
On January 22 2013 08:48 KwarK wrote:
If gun owners, and implicitly the threat of killing those they disagree with, are presently having an impact on the democratic process then that is what we who believe in democracy would define as a problem. That's not really a defence of gun ownership to oppose the government, that's a really big reason to disarm them in the name of freedom.

Also someone earlier made the point that Jefferson made it unequivocally clear that the right to bear arms was to act as a functional counterbalance to the army, both domestic and foreign. That battle was lost with the development of a modern, mechanised military in the World Wars, a militia couldn't keep pace with the changing nature of the battlefield. But if you're a constitutional purist then stop talking about hunting and self defence and start demanding the right to own tanks, helicopter gunships and all the rest of it. That's what the constitution was talking about. Or you could just not be a constitutional purist.


We do actually have the ability to own all those things. I could buy a mig for like 250k at an air show and load it up with missiles if I wanted to. You have to go though a ton of paperwork and register it with the government and it would be a bitch and a half to maintain and fuel it but there really isn't anything stooping people in america from getting those things other then the huge price tags of them.

the first part of your post confused me a lot. Threatening to kill people you don't believe in can happen (and has happened throughout history) with guns is no different then threatening to go down with spears or bows and killing the people you don't agree with. The fact that the mob has a rifle or a pitchfork doesn't really change the situation in anyway.
A wise man will say that he knows nothing. We're gona party like its 2752 Hail Dark Brandon
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
January 22 2013 00:02 GMT
#7466
On January 22 2013 08:59 Sermokala wrote:
The fact that the mob has a rifle or a pitchfork doesn't really change the situation in anyway.


Hmm, I think the history of the 20th century is difficult to understand if this is the case...
shikata ga nai
llIH
Profile Joined June 2011
Norway2143 Posts
January 22 2013 00:04 GMT
#7467
What do you guys think about Piers Morgan's thoughts about the subject?
He is comparing the UK to the worst states in the US. Several people said that where there are armed civilians there is less deaths from gunfire. I believe so. But there must be some rules and control.... My god this topic is so damn hard to discuss.
Zahir
Profile Joined March 2012
United States947 Posts
January 22 2013 00:05 GMT
#7468
On January 22 2013 08:43 sam!zdat wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 22 2013 08:40 Zahir wrote:
I would not be so quick to assume the days of gun ownership having a significant impact on us politics and society are over.


Yes, but it's to the benefit of the tyrants


How do you figure? I mean, theres about 2x gun ownership in the south and Midwest and among conservatives as compared to liberals, but all told gun ownership is fairly evenly spread. If you mean the fact that the army has the biggest guns, well, most people view gun ownership and disarmament/pacifism as two different issues.
What is best? To crush the Zerg, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the Protoss.
Sermokala
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States13924 Posts
January 22 2013 00:06 GMT
#7469
On January 22 2013 09:02 sam!zdat wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 22 2013 08:59 Sermokala wrote:
The fact that the mob has a rifle or a pitchfork doesn't really change the situation in anyway.


Hmm, I think the history of the 20th century is difficult to understand if this is the case...

What do you mean the history of the 20th century is literally referring to 100 years. What part of that time period is difficult to understand?
A wise man will say that he knows nothing. We're gona party like its 2752 Hail Dark Brandon
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
January 22 2013 00:07 GMT
#7470
On January 22 2013 08:48 KwarK wrote:
If gun owners, and implicitly the threat of killing those they disagree with, are presently having an impact on the democratic process then that is what we who believe in democracy would define as a problem. That's not really a defence of gun ownership to oppose the government, that's a really big reason to disarm them in the name of freedom.

Also someone earlier made the point that Jefferson made it unequivocally clear that the right to bear arms was to act as a functional counterbalance to the army, both domestic and foreign. That battle was lost with the development of a modern, mechanised military in the World Wars, a militia couldn't keep pace with the changing nature of the battlefield. But if you're a constitutional purist then stop talking about hunting and self defence and start demanding the right to own tanks, helicopter gunships and all the rest of it. That's what the constitution was talking about. Or you could just not be a constitutional purist.

I don't think this argument weighs much but someone on another forum argued that if civilians revolted against a US government that went totalitarian and still somehow had the support of the army (lol) then civilians would fights guerilla style without ever engaging directly.

I guess that's how you'd put an unnoticeable dent in the absurdly deep US army? I dunno. People don't seem to understand that one outdated Apache could gun down tens of cutesie little rebels at night through dense foliage. It's just ludicrous to even consider.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
nunez
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Norway4003 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-22 00:07:52
January 22 2013 00:07 GMT
#7471
On January 22 2013 08:48 KwarK wrote:
That battle was lost with the development of a modern, mechanised military in the World Wars, a militia couldn't keep pace with the changing nature of the battlefield.


what about the vietnam war. or do you not think the Viet Cong is a militia?
i am a bit unsure of the definitions.
conspired against by a confederacy of dunces.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-22 00:10:39
January 22 2013 00:09 GMT
#7472
On January 22 2013 09:05 Zahir wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 22 2013 08:43 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 22 2013 08:40 Zahir wrote:
I would not be so quick to assume the days of gun ownership having a significant impact on us politics and society are over.


Yes, but it's to the benefit of the tyrants


How do you figure? I mean, theres about 2x gun ownership in the south and Midwest and among conservatives as compared to liberals, but all told gun ownership is fairly evenly spread. If you mean the fact that the army has the biggest guns, well, most people view gun ownership and disarmament/pacifism as two different issues.


Who makes money when people buy guns and ammunition?

edit:
On January 22 2013 09:06 Sermokala wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 22 2013 09:02 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 22 2013 08:59 Sermokala wrote:
The fact that the mob has a rifle or a pitchfork doesn't really change the situation in anyway.


Hmm, I think the history of the 20th century is difficult to understand if this is the case...

What do you mean the history of the 20th century is literally referring to 100 years. What part of that time period is difficult to understand?


How about the Bolsheviks and the Maoists? Could they have done that with pitchforks?
shikata ga nai
Zahir
Profile Joined March 2012
United States947 Posts
January 22 2013 00:13 GMT
#7473
On January 22 2013 08:48 KwarK wrote:
If gun owners, and implicitly the threat of killing those they disagree with, are presently having an impact on the democratic process then that is what we who believe in democracy would define as a problem. That's not really a defence of gun ownership to oppose the government, that's a really big reason to disarm them in the name of freedom.

Also someone earlier made the point that Jefferson made it unequivocally clear that the right to bear arms was to act as a functional counterbalance to the army, both domestic and foreign. That battle was lost with the development of a modern, mechanised military in the World Wars, a militia couldn't keep pace with the changing nature of the battlefield. But if you're a constitutional purist then stop talking about hunting and self defence and start demanding the right to own tanks, helicopter gunships and all the rest of it. That's what the constitution was talking about. Or you could just not be a constitutional purist.


I believe the better version of what you're arguing against is that an armed populace is the only remaining deterrent to tyranny after the democratic process has already broken down. Which it does, to some degree, every day. The government is imprisoning and ocassionally torturing people without due process at the moment. Not the biggest deal, given the scale, but the point is, not everything the government does is a product of any democratic process. And the government itself is far from the only organized threat that certain victimized elements within the us population have had to deal with.
What is best? To crush the Zerg, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the Protoss.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
January 22 2013 00:15 GMT
#7474
No, the better version is that the democratic process has already broken down, there is already tyranny, and it is because people don't read enough books, not because they don't own enough guns.
shikata ga nai
Aerisky
Profile Blog Joined May 2012
United States12129 Posts
January 22 2013 00:15 GMT
#7475
lol samizdat, you are a trooper. Used to think you and farvacola were rather caustic and condescending, but that was before I realized simply how inane the stuff is you're dealing with. Personally my ideas, opinions, and sense of logic are still very weak, so it's surprisingly informative to read through general threads that, regardless of having declined and fallen into abject (and forgive my professional diction) shitfests, still have gems of posters with enlightening thoughts to share.
Jim while Johnny had had had had had had had; had had had had the better effect on the teacher.
Zahir
Profile Joined March 2012
United States947 Posts
January 22 2013 00:16 GMT
#7476
On January 22 2013 09:09 sam!zdat wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 22 2013 09:05 Zahir wrote:
On January 22 2013 08:43 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 22 2013 08:40 Zahir wrote:
I would not be so quick to assume the days of gun ownership having a significant impact on us politics and society are over.


Yes, but it's to the benefit of the tyrants


How do you figure? I mean, theres about 2x gun ownership in the south and Midwest and among conservatives as compared to liberals, but all told gun ownership is fairly evenly spread. If you mean the fact that the army has the biggest guns, well, most people view gun ownership and disarmament/pacifism as two different issues.


Who makes money when people buy guns and ammunition?

edit:
Show nested quote +
On January 22 2013 09:06 Sermokala wrote:
On January 22 2013 09:02 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 22 2013 08:59 Sermokala wrote:
The fact that the mob has a rifle or a pitchfork doesn't really change the situation in anyway.


Hmm, I think the history of the 20th century is difficult to understand if this is the case...

What do you mean the history of the 20th century is literally referring to 100 years. What part of that time period is difficult to understand?


How about the Bolsheviks and the Maoists? Could they have done that with pitchforks?


Haha, touché. But if you're going to look at it in those terms, would not a ban simply shift profits into the hands of guns smugglers? War on drugs hasn't been too successful from an economic liberation standpoint.
What is best? To crush the Zerg, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the Protoss.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-22 00:18:21
January 22 2013 00:16 GMT
#7477
Thanks, I appreciate that very kind of you to say

edit: @above, it's true, but I do think guns are a bit easier to control than drugs (and more difficult to hide their manufacture). That's an interesting problem to think about, however.
shikata ga nai
llIH
Profile Joined June 2011
Norway2143 Posts
January 22 2013 00:18 GMT
#7478
On January 22 2013 09:15 sam!zdat wrote:
No, the better version is that the democratic process has already broken down, there is already tyranny, and it is because people don't read enough books, not because they don't own enough guns.


So true.
smokeyhoodoo
Profile Joined January 2010
United States1021 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-22 00:21:03
January 22 2013 00:20 GMT
#7479
On January 22 2013 08:48 KwarK wrote:
If gun owners, and implicitly the threat of killing those they disagree with, are presently having an impact on the democratic process then that is what we who believe in democracy would define as a problem. That's not really a defence of gun ownership to oppose the government, that's a really big reason to disarm them in the name of freedom.

Also someone earlier made the point that Jefferson made it unequivocally clear that the right to bear arms was to act as a functional counterbalance to the army, both domestic and foreign. That battle was lost with the development of a modern, mechanised military in the World Wars, a militia couldn't keep pace with the changing nature of the battlefield. But if you're a constitutional purist then stop talking about hunting and self defence and start demanding the right to own tanks, helicopter gunships and all the rest of it. That's what the constitution was talking about. Or you could just not be a constitutional purist.


A militia can't be mechanized and modern? Does militia automatically mean armed with muskets? I think perhaps people have a stigma attached to the word militia.
There is no cow level
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
January 22 2013 00:22 GMT
#7480
On January 22 2013 09:20 smokeyhoodoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 22 2013 08:48 KwarK wrote:
If gun owners, and implicitly the threat of killing those they disagree with, are presently having an impact on the democratic process then that is what we who believe in democracy would define as a problem. That's not really a defence of gun ownership to oppose the government, that's a really big reason to disarm them in the name of freedom.

Also someone earlier made the point that Jefferson made it unequivocally clear that the right to bear arms was to act as a functional counterbalance to the army, both domestic and foreign. That battle was lost with the development of a modern, mechanised military in the World Wars, a militia couldn't keep pace with the changing nature of the battlefield. But if you're a constitutional purist then stop talking about hunting and self defence and start demanding the right to own tanks, helicopter gunships and all the rest of it. That's what the constitution was talking about. Or you could just not be a constitutional purist.


A militia can't be mechanized and modern? Does militia automatically mean armed with muskets? I think perhaps people have a stigma attached to the word militia.

No he's talking about the fact that any "militia" in the US wouldn't be mechanized and modern because of various limits.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
Prev 1 372 373 374 375 376 891 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 10h 51m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nathanias 214
Liquid`TLO 141
ForJumy 59
StarCraft: Brood War
Hyuk 609
NaDa 52
Aegong 42
League of Legends
Dendi1087
syndereN218
Counter-Strike
Fnx 1488
flusha362
Super Smash Bros
AZ_Axe27
Other Games
tarik_tv8958
Grubby2718
FrodaN1826
C9.Mang0288
Day[9].tv153
Maynarde131
ViBE121
Livibee95
shahzam56
Sick45
Liquid`Ken10
rubinoeu6
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick744
BasetradeTV20
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• RyuSc2 37
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• Diggity20
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22538
League of Legends
• Doublelift4880
Other Games
• imaqtpie1711
• Scarra1218
• Day9tv153
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
10h 51m
ByuN vs Zoun
SHIN vs TriGGeR
Cyan vs ShoWTimE
Rogue vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs Solar
Reynor vs Maru
herO vs Cure
Serral vs Classic
Esports World Cup
1d 10h
Esports World Cup
2 days
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
[ Show More ]
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Online Event
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.