|
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. |
On February 21 2012 22:58 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
Even if I am going to get smashed, I'd rather go down fighting and take a few of the bastards with me.
While I can see why you would think like that, thats unfortunately not the way things are anymore. If the army wants you dead they will most likely use more advanced means then guns. (UAVs, Armored vehicles, smart bombs etc.) I can see how this concept was valid 250 years ago, but it isn't anymore in my opinion.
|
On February 21 2012 22:58 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
Even if I am going to get smashed, I'd rather go down fighting and take a few of the bastards with me.
Which bastards? The soldiers? They are your friends, family. They are the american people as well.
|
Of course you should be able to own and carry a gun and even high powered assault weapons. Its protection from home intrusion and from tyrannical government.
Its because people can't own guns in North Korea and Iraq and Saudi Arabia these tyrants come to power and oppress the people!
|
You realize that the military is not omniscient right? Resistance movements are notoriously effective, within the 20th century alone.
|
Which bastards? The soldiers? They are your friends, family. They are the american people as well.
No friends of mine would ever join with a tyrannical government. I don't chill with Quizzlings.
|
On February 21 2012 23:19 jackdaniels wrote:
Its because people can't own guns in North Korea and Iraq and Saudi Arabia these tyrants come to power and oppress the people!
Guess what, people don't carry guns in South Korea, that's why the the south korean tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
Guess what, people don't carry guns in India, that's why the the indian tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
See, in similar regions 2 counter examples. Guns can help building democracy sometimes but they do not maintain democracy. What maintains democracy is people voting to legimate the power. And 50% of the people voting is the sign of an ill democracy imo.
|
On February 21 2012 23:19 jackdaniels wrote:
Of course you should be able to own and carry a gun and even high powered assault weapons. Its protection from home intrusion and from tyrannical government.
Its because people can't own guns in North Korea and Iraq and Saudi Arabia these tyrants come to power and oppress the people!
I don't think you understand what you are talking about to be honest. If you ever watch a documentary about North Korea you will see just how brainwashed the people are. If they had free acces to weapons they would probably raise them against the US before they raise them against the government.
|
On February 21 2012 23:23 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:Show nested quote +Which bastards? The soldiers? They are your friends, family. They are the american people as well. No friends of mine would ever join with a tyrannical government. I don't chill with Quizzlings.
You must somehow now a soldier don't you? They have a family, friends. They won't shoot on them. So like in every revolution the army finishes by going on the people side.
Precision: If 1% of maniacs go on for a revolution, it's not a revolution.
|
Guess what, people don't carry guns in South Korea, that's why the the south korean tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
Guess what, people don't carry guns in India, that's why the the indian tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
Really if you look at how much money these governments steal from their citizens (taxes) every year you could make a very good case that they are oppressed.
|
North Koreans have universal military service. That is slavery to the state. Pretty clear cut case of oppression.
|
On February 21 2012 23:28 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:Show nested quote +
Guess what, people don't carry guns in South Korea, that's why the the south korean tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
Guess what, people don't carry guns in India, that's why the the indian tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
Really if you look at how much money these governments steal from their citizens (taxes) every year you could make a very good case that they are oppressed.
I don't really know the specifics of how efficient India or South Korea are at turning their taxes into wealth but you're getting dangerously close to a discussion of socialism vs capitalism or big government vs small. Surely that's not your intent and you just had a brainfart, right?
|
Don't even talk about resistance movements in a modern setting. All we've seen so far is a wildly backwards people with the same technology as 1950 combined with people who are horrid with pr and what a successful resistance movement is about.
If a resistance happened in america it would be a completely different game. so much space to hide stuff and so much tech and knowledge on people who are just gotten a high school education.
|
You must somehow now a soldier don't you? They have a family, friends. They won't shoot on them. So like in every revolution the army finishes by going on the people side.
Well that's not always how it works. Take the October revolution, for example. There you had a battle between two armies white and red which dragged on for a while. or the Irish revolution the british army was against the population for quite some time. so it's a romantic view but not necessarily historically accurate.
|
On February 21 2012 23:29 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
North Koreans have universal military service. That is slavery to the state. Pretty clear cut case of oppression.
You have absolutely lost your point, do you honeslty believe that North Koreans would start a revolution if everyone had a gun? Are you completely delusional?
|
On February 21 2012 23:28 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:Show nested quote +
Guess what, people don't carry guns in South Korea, that's why the the south korean tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
Guess what, people don't carry guns in India, that's why the the indian tyrant oppress the people...oh wait.
Really if you look at how much money these governments steal from their citizens (taxes) every year you could make a very good case that they are oppressed.
Please don't go down this road...Taxes are good if well used, used for the welfare of the citizen and reducing inequalities. But you must be one of this jackass thinking that if you're poor it must be your fault , you being lazy or whatever.
I'm glad to pay tax, I don't feel oppress at all. I wish I pay more tax in the UK, so the health care system would be free for all.
|
For me the gun-debate basically boils down to this: Should guns be made legal in countries where they aren't at the moment? Certainly not. Should guns be made illegal in countries where they are legal at the moment? Very, very doubtfull, as it probably won't work seeing as there's so many guns about.
|
On February 21 2012 23:34 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:Show nested quote +
You must somehow now a soldier don't you? They have a family, friends. They won't shoot on them. So like in every revolution the army finishes by going on the people side.
or the Irish revolution the british army was against the population for quite some time. so it's a romantic view but not necessarily historically accurate.
You are not accurate, so you imagine that a foreign country would take over the US? If they were to be tyrants in the US, it would be a US tyrant. So you would fight against US soldiers.
|
Please don't go down this road...Taxes are good if well used, used for the welfare of the citizen and reducing inequalities. But you must be one of this jackass thinking that if you're poor it must be your fault , you being lazy or whatever.
It is impossible to do evil for good purposes; ultimately the harm done in the process will out weigh any good. Taxes aren't good. They're a scam. They are robbery. If the whole institution wasn't rotten you wouldn't need to force it on people. Do you believe in forcing people to do things they don't want to do? Because for me, I believe in voluntarism. I think it's wrong to use violence or coercion to get your way. And yes, I absolutely am one of those jackasses who think that poor people tend to make worse financial decisions on average than rich people. My mother raised me on a welfare cheque, but because she was frugal with her money and industrious besides she ended up owning a farm. So if you think that some random schmuck who is whining about the inequality of the system has it worse than a single mother raising three kids on a welfare cheque then go on, I'd like to hear his hard luck story, but I'd wager dollars to donuts that he spent too much money on booze or smokes, didn't buy second hand clothes, spent too much money on broads, too lazy to work, whatever. Of course this only goes for people in affluent western socities, for those in the third world obviously there are no opportunities and they are relegated to poverty no matter what they do. This is of course shameful but the solution to it is not what you think.
|
I'm fairly happy that people aren't allowed to carry guns in Norway. I'm sure guns are nice for self defense or whatever, but it doesn't really help you if everyone around have one as well.
|
On February 21 2012 23:47 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:Show nested quote +Please don't go down this road...Taxes are good if well used, used for the welfare of the citizen and reducing inequalities. But you must be one of this jackass thinking that if you're poor it must be your fault , you being lazy or whatever.
It is impossible to do evil for good purposes; ultimately the harm done in the process will out weigh any good. Taxes aren't good. They're a scam. They are robbery. If the whole institution wasn't rotten you wouldn't need to force it on people. Do you believe in forcing people to do things they don't want to do? Because for me, I believe in voluntarism. I think it's wrong to use violence or coercion to get your way. And yes, I absolutely am one of those jackasses who think that poor people tend to make worse financial decisions on average than rich people. My mother raised me on a welfare cheque, but because she was frugal with her money and industrious besides she ended up owning a farm. So if you think that some random schmuck who is whining about the inequality of the system has it worse than a single mother raising three kids on a welfare cheque then go on, I'd like to hear his hard luck story, but I'd wager dollars to donuts that he spent too much money on booze or smokes, didn't buy second hand clothes, spent too much money on broads, too lazy to work, whatever. Of course this only goes for people in affluent western socities, for those in the third world obviously there are no opportunities and they are relegated to poverty no matter what they do. This is of course shameful but the solution to it is not what you think.
And who paid for your mother's welfare cheque? Was that perhaps... taxes? :O
The rest of your post makes you out to be a prejudiced bigot: while there are of course people who squander money on stuff they shouldn't, and are too lazy to work besides, these are the minority, not the majority of poor people. Not even in affluent western socieities. Or are you trying to claim that now that unemployment is up to 25% in Spain, that 25% of the population are a bunch of lazy drunks who just want to mooch off the state?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
