Iraq's Rebuke to the NRA

Slate.com ^ | 03/14/2003 | Timothy Noah

[tpaine]

I refuted his pro-gun control, anti-constitutional comments on #138.
He can't/won't reply to the issue, but wisecracks back, -- which I noted.

Now, -- why exactly is any of that your concern?

[jwalsh07]

Just trying to cheer you up on a Friday night. Lighten up.

.....Or not, it's a free republic.

[merak]

There are a number of problems which the 2'nd ammendment addresses, of which the possibility of out-of-control governments is just one. For instance, one problem which arises in countries which do not allow their citizens to own firearms, is people being killed by poison snakes. In India, as I read it, something like 50,000 people get killed by poison snakes every year. In this country, the people SHOOT poisonous snakes. I kind of like it better that way myself...

[tpaine]

How droll, amigo, - seeing you jumped me. -- 'Lighten' yourself....

[jwalsh07]

You're right, I should have left out the expletives.

[ApesForEvolution]

Supposing they all own a firearm that Sodom gave them; who controls the ammunition and when do the Iraqis get some?

[primeval patriot]

current glut of weapons

accidental deaths

ease of access

gun show loophole

suspected criminals

Reasonable limits

ethnic violence

mere availablity may lead to use.

Thanks for the reply, but all you've done is post the standard gun-grabber boilerplate.

I think you're just playing games and wasting everyone's time.

[Washi]

However, most gun deaths are not a result of the activities of organized or habitual criminals. Most gun murders are first time offenses (drunken fights, domestic violence etc.)

cite, please.

Washi

[Jhoffa_]

By the way, where did you pick up that manner of speaking? Was it from the shop floor?

I agree with your earlier post. You do have a knack for being offensive.

[Torie]

Some posters have a certain history with one another. But that does not refute your point. I will leave it at that.

[tpaine]

Garry Wills in his book "A Necessary Evil," wrote thusly:

"History, philology, and logic furnish no solid basis for thinking the Second Amendment has anything to do with the private ownership of guns."
-Torie-


BTW, torie, I was reading the footnotes to the "Communitarian" link I posted above. They had an interesting comment on your 'hero':


440
"Perhaps the oddest reinterpretation of the original intent of the Second Amendment is Garry Wills's theory that the Second Amendment, rather than guaranteeing a right of individuals, or a right of state governments, actually means nothing at all.

See Garry Wills, The New Revolutionaries, N.Y. Rev. Books, Aug. 10, 1995, at 50.
The Second Amendment has no content whatsoever, Wills argues, and was a conscious fraud perpetrated on the American public by James Madison, who used clever draftsmanship to render the Amendment meaningless.
See id.
Further, according to Wills, Madison's secret intention about the Second Amendment (never before discerned by any scholar other than Wills) showed control over the intent of the state legislatures that ratified the Amendment, naively thinking that they were ratifying the right of the American people to keep and bear arms."
__________________________

[BikerTrash]

And if I pull my 6 year old daughter out of public schools, teachers like you will be just one of the many reasons.

Do it, man! Do it Monday if possible. If not, make it soon! Your precious little one WILL be taught lies in public school, count on it! This thread is proof of that.

HOMESCHOOL! Teach your kids yourself that this is a free country, especially if you want it to stay that way for them. I can think of nothing more important and few things of equal importance.

And maybe, just maybe...leftist pukes who want aggressive enforcement of unconstitutional laws by ABC agency jack booted thugs to put centuries old technology back in the bottle by whatever means necessary will start to become only a bad memory. Might even invoke a nostalgic chuckle someday.

It was beautiful today in Colorado. My eight year old boy and I went shooting today. Since safety was taught as well as skills it will count towards school hours. History of warfare was taught concurrently, as he has a keen interest for this subject. Can you imagine? He was technically in school with a firearm and no one was injured, killed, threatened, arrested, all was good, nothing was bad and it was FANTASTIC! Time of more quality than this does not exist.

Now then, is hardware the problem? Or could it be the system?

[Travis McGee]

Very nice list you posted, irrelevent to the discussion, but nice.

So we have established that Mr. "American Government Teacher" has a history book or two around. Good.

Now, you have stated that seeking the original intent of the framers of the constitution is useless, it's all a matter of interpretation, blablablah. Nothing to back this up, just your contention.

I listed at least ten very clear and unambiguous quotes by our founding fathers stating in clear language their intent behind the adoption of the 2 amd., and I can post twenty or thirty more just as easily.

So far you have, although being asked repeatedly, posted zero, zip, nada, goose egg, none, nothing refuting the clear language of the founders in support of the RKBA.

Surely, Mr. "American Government Teacher", you can put together another nice list like your list of obscure British skirmishes, of other important Americans from the time of the adoption of the constitution, refuting what our founding fathers said about the RKBA?

Even ONE?

Hours have gone by, still you run away from my challenge like a yellow coward.

Come on Mr. Am Govt teacher, PUT UP, OR SHUT UP.

.

.

.

.

(Sound of crickets.)

[Zon]

4. I am a moron who hasn't read the constitution.

I teach american government! The constitution of course only has power when it is interpreted and implemented by the Court. The court doesn't appear to share the NRA's veiw on the second ammendment at this time. So to claim I am in error is to only reveal an alarming lack of attention on your part.

5. Its not the federal government's job to regulate guns.

The federal governments job is to do what we as citizens ask it to do within the boundaries of the Consitution. Given the fact that no federal firearms law has ever been overturned by the Court, it would appear the FG has yet to exceed its constitutional mandate in this area.

And, the lesson I've learned:

1. Its easy to rile up you yahoos by posting an anti-gun article. Sadly while your barrage of responses may be intense, the aren't very intelligent. Try harder!

The question is not if, but how soon you'll be out of a job.

Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights. --Maryland Law Review

The authors quickly gloss over this major detail. The first responsibility for each citizen is to not initiate harm/force, threat of harm/force or fraud against another person or their property. That must be the first and paramount priority. Since every politician, bureaucrat and government employee is first a citizen, they have the same paramount priority.

A person that is in possession of a gun or any object does not equate to the person having initiated harm/force against another person. On the other hand, threatening to throw a person in jail because they are in possession of a gun is a threat of force against a person that is minding their own business.

It's not about rights nearly as much as it is about who is initiating force, threat of force and fraud against people that are minding their own business.

It's been said often that a sign of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. I'd say that doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a sure sign of incompetence and irrationality.

Politicians and bureaucrats aren't insane. They know exactly what they are doing. And a main stream news media is glad to facilitate the politicians and bureaucrats, lies and deceptions. That is also true for the authors that wrote the above article for the Maryland Law Review

Why do you think congress is so often called lawmakers? If there aren't enough problems for politicians and bureaucrats to proclaim they're trying to solve they create "boogie man" problems -- problems that don't exist -- and then proclaim to be working on solving those problems.

Now, as far as job security goes that isn't irrational or necessarily incompetent. Least wise not on a purely self-serving basis. But their job security does not take precedence over what they are paid to do.

What is the primary job/duty of government? To protect people and their property from the initiation of force, fraud and threat of force -- to protect people and their property from being harmed by others.

Creating "boogie man" problems and then proclaiming to work on solving those problem for the purpose of job security is fraud. On the scale that politicians in Washington do it it is massive fraud. A third to half of federal government expenditures are spent on frauds created by politicians and bureaucrats in Washington.

That's to be expected when the method politicians and bureaucrats use to fund government is threat of force in the first place. So right off the bat politicians and bureaucrats are in bed with creating injustice.

Income taxes are collected by strong arm tactics: "if you don't pay your taxes you'll be fined and go to jail". Conversely, a consumption tax such as the National Retail Sales Tax (NRST) is a voluntary tax. Wherein if you don't want to pay the tax don't buy the item.

Compared to the massive fraud implemented by politicians and bureaucrats, fraud in the business community barley registers on the "Richter" scale.

Simply put, for the past 150 years government objective is to expand government jobs, cash-flow and control. In that sense it is not unlike any business. But government is not a business and the people never intended for the government to have the growth and control dynamics of a business. The only, I repeat, the only way the government could expand its cash flow, size and control to a hundred times the power and size of the largest fortune 50 companies was by initiating force. The initiation of force is enacted as laws by politicians and bureaucrats. Their minions do the dirty work of initiating the physical force.

Who are the wealth providers and who are the parasites? Who offers competitive products and services in a free market? Who provides jobs, necessities and luxuries to sustain and enhance human life? Who forces people to buy their services or else go to jail?  Who initiates force, threat of force and fraud?

Politicians and bureaucrats are far more destructive and harmful to innocent people than all petty criminals combined. And for sure, business and science have done more to benefit people than politicians and bureaucrats. Those two -- government and business-science -- for the most part at this point in time are opposing forces.

The masses are increasingly understanding the frauds impinged on them by politicians and bureaucrats. And that "wake-up" awareness is only going to escalate. As is their awareness and understanding that business and science provides them with massive benefits. Those two effects are caused by people waking up the power of their own rational conscious faculties as the only real and valid authority -- sounding the death knell of the status quo.

Politicians and bureaucrats as well as main stream media reporters and journalists and academics are becoming increasingly aware of that. For sure, it will be interesting to see which ones hang on fighting tooth and nail to the very end despite the unavoidable demise of the status quo -- a lesson in futility. ...And who will flip to rational competence and redeem themselves honorably with integrity as they hold themselves accountable for their past harms inflicted on what was in the past an unsuspecting people.

That is/will occur faster than most people can imagine. To understand why is to understand how the illusions foisted on people of whom holds real power and honor has been hidden from the masses by manipulating mysticism in the minds of the masses. And how thin the veil has been stretched. It has been stretched tissue thin and will fall apart/collapse like a water-logged tissue. Think of how quickly Nicolae Ceausescu was brought down when "X" number of people saw though the illusion of power.

[palmer]

Its easy to rile up you yahoos by posting an anti-gun article

Here's a better idea. Buy a gun, learn how to use it and start taking responsibility for defending your life, property and family. If that doesn't suit you, then at least take responsibility for the people you hire to protect you: join a police watchdog group or do some ride-alongs. Support your local police in some way. Resist efforts to federalize police functions as we have given ample evidence of how that leads to tyranny.

If suggestions don't appeal to you, then do some more reading. I was once more or less brainwashed, I even contributed to HCI. In my case I had never heard any arguments to the contrary. I still read both sides of the issue and appreciated your arguments minus the slurs and gun grabber talking points.

[Alas Babylon!]

I said NCO's wouldn't do it, and I was right. From your link:

Of those with more than 15 years of service, 87% replied "disagree" or "strongly disagree." Responses by members of the Special Forces Underground were unprintable; basically, there will not be many officers who give that order more than once.

NCO's are the backbone of the military in more ways than one. Especially Staff/Senior NCO's. I stand by my original statement.

I DO love Free Republic!

[harpseal]

Clearly registration leaqds to confiscation. Look at New York City. The guns in Iraq issue is really simple loyal members of the Baath party are armed. Those not so affiliated are not armed. During the 1930's in Germany loyal members of the National Socialist Workers Party were armed. Jews and other undesireables were unarmed.

Because the NY Times says something does not make it so.

[thisiskubrick]

Do you really think Saddam would furnish guns WITH ammo to the very people who he's viciously oppressed for so long. In essence giving them the "chance", however remotely, to overthrow, or kill him?

Good question! Saddam's "arming" of the population seems like a PR ploy, to scare us from fighting a war in the city from street to street.

[Puppage]

I'm still waiting for Brokaw, Rather or Jennings to answer it, too.

[FSPress]

GLAD TO SEE ANOTHER CALIFORNIA "CONSERVTIVE"