Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuttyd

Alexis de Tocqueville was a 19th century thinker. We don't live in the 19th century.

---

I was putting tongue into cheek.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

I was putting tongue into cheek.

---

I knew you knew that. I put that in there for Tom's benefit.


Tut

Quote:

---

Political society has evolved into something vastly different to that which captured deTocqueville imagination.

---

yeah much better

Gun manufacturers like all corporations sell products for profit, and don't care what the outcomes of that profit is as long as they don't have pay for it.Its no coincidence they spent a bunch of loot to get laws that make them NOT responsible for what their guns do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/21/po...guns.html?_r=0

Allowing the previous ban to expire and stopping lawsuits has the earmarks of a business decision to increase and protect profits.

What do you expect it is a capitalist society where everything is subserviant to profit

Wonder if Tom would consider it a soft tyranny. Doubt it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Then go defend our country the way real soldiers do if you have a right to act, dress, and arm yourselves like them.

But you are the same guys who don't want REAL soldier on every corner.

---

You want a military state?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

You want a military state?

---

Wouldn't you be paying their salaries and benefits through your taxes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Wonder if Tom would consider it a soft tyranny. Doubt it.

---

No its more like a hard tyranny

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

You want a military state?

---

Its already a military state if everybody has a military weapon. Maybe that's what you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Its already a military state if everybody has a military weapon. Maybe thats what you want.

---

I'm not the one asking for a soldier on every corner. It's still as simple as the constitution says, my right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed." Get over it.

I want trained people on those corners as in MORE cops, and you want civilian volunteers to have the same thing as my cops. I think my way is safer. You want to carry an army gun, join the army.

But in your world its okay to be an armed vigilante accountable to no one. I say you have no right to the same weapons as my army does. And guys like Zimmerman have no right to be armed policemen and act without authority. Gang banger and drug dealers have no rights to be armed either.

There are plenty of weapons you can have that don't infringe on your rights to bear arms, or mine to be safe and secure. And you and your AR, or CCP have no authority to question anyone you think may be up to no good, or looks out of place to YOU!

So what's your motive to being an UN regulated militia? Or a vigilante? Both are against the law, and your beloved constitutional rights.

Again, what part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

You have the same problem understanding that the subordinate clause has no bearing on the meaning of the second that the courts have shot down - the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, not conditional on being part of an active militia. You must have some warped view of history to imagine our founding fathers would have that as its intent just a few years out from taking up arms against "absolute" government tyranny.

How long would do you think it would have taken them to get a permit from King George so they could revolt against him?

Hello again, Steve:

Quote:

---

How long would do you think it would have taken them to get a permit from King George so they could revolt against him?

---

I UNDERSTAND having a gun to protect your family. I UNDERSTAND collecting guns, and I even UNDERSTAND hunting.

But, you're not, are you, one of those dingbats who think your assault rifle is going to DEFEND you against an Apache helicopter with 50 cal machine guns?

Excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

But, you're not, are you, one of those dingbats who think your assault rifle is gonna DEFEND you against an Apache helicopter with 50 cal machine guns??

---

I'm not any kind of a dingbat, are you?

Hello again, Steve:

So, you DO think your guns will defend you against the government.

Okee doakee.

excon

That's why they think its okay to take your gun into a bar in case the bartender tells them they have had enough and wants to infringe on their right to drink. Or to work in case the boss wants to infringe on their right to work, or to church in case their right to sin is infringed upon by the preacher.

Or shoot black guys walking through THEIR neighbor hood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

So, you DO think your guns will defend you against the government.

Okee doakee.

excon

---

And your attempt to ridicule changes the facts about my rights how?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Thats why they think its okay to take your gun into a bar in case the bartender tells them they have had enough and wants to infringe on their right to drink. Or to work in case the boss wants to infringe on their right to work, or to church in case their right to sin is infringed upon by the preacher.

Or shoot black guys walking thru THEIR neighbor hood.

---

Are you two just trying to see how ridiculous you can be today?

Are you saying none of these things have happened?

Preacher Shot Before Church Knife Attack

Tennessee man charged in Vegas bartender killing - FOX5 Vegas - KVVU

I could go on, but why keep being ridiculous?