The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Ansiktsburk
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Central Scandinavia

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Ansiktsburk » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:28 am

Walker wrote:
Ansiktsburk wrote:
Walker wrote:Henry makes a lot of Philosophical Sense.

Thread title is wrong, not surprising.

Here is the Philosophical Position:

The right to defend what is God-given is the right.

What is given by God is precious, in your care.

Henry offers the position of responsibility.

Each human is responsible for what is precious to himself.

What is precious is given by God.

Not to be taken lightly.

Remember, none of this is faith, and dog registration (or cars), or paying an insurance fee to be a legal native-born citizen, is a distraction, Henry.

- CH Walker
It's interesting that belief in a religion and the willingness to kill other people seem to go hand in hand. What's the explanation? This life is not something to care so much about?
I brought up philosophy.

You brought up religion.

Your question pertains to your topic. So, expound.
"The right to defend what's god-given is right".

Walker
Posts: 6892
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Walker » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:30 am

Philosophically and rationally,

You do not give life to yourself.

Whatever does, is God.

Walker
Posts: 6892
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Walker » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:32 am

Now you have enough to work with.

Ansiktsburk
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Central Scandinavia

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Ansiktsburk » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:36 am

Does God have anything to do with religion?

Walker
Posts: 6892
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Walker » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:39 am

Oh, you're the guy who asks the questions! That's who you are!

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Obvious Leo » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:52 am

Walker wrote:Philosophically and rationally,

You do not give life to yourself.

Whatever does, is God.
And god has given you the right to shoot any fucker who happens to get up your nose, has he? God bless America.

Ansiktsburk
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Central Scandinavia

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Ansiktsburk » Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:04 am

Walker wrote:Oh, you're the guy who asks the questions! That's who you are!
Ok. Then what is your answer?

Walker
Posts: 6892
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Walker » Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:05 am

Obvious Leo wrote:
Walker wrote:Philosophically and rationally,

You do not give life to yourself.

Whatever does, is God.
And god has given you the right to shoot any fucker who happens to get up your nose, has he? God bless America.
Think it over, Leo. I’ve read your words and you’re very smart, too smart to snarl. There’s nothing to prove here, nothing to defend, nothing to attack. What I’ve written is the philosophical position for the second amendment issue, which is based on the recognition of what gives life.

The system of law to defend that which is not given by man, is the historic attraction to the United States. And it is a state of mind, much as true freedom is a state of mind. This is what Henry knows, not only because it makes rational sense, but because it follows a natural order of life. The state of mind does require what is good in man, and the eternal fear of humanity is that what is good in man will recede into darkness.

Peace.

Ansiktsburk
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Central Scandinavia

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Ansiktsburk » Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:25 am

And that gives you the right to shoot trespassers.

Walker
Posts: 6892
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Walker » Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:33 am

The question man makes an assertion.

You're branching out.

You could stop there and be a bigot.

Or, you could expand your awareness sufficiently to form principles applicable to man ... perhaps.

You'd be venturing into philosophy.

How to get there from here ... hmmmm.

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Obvious Leo » Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:45 am

Fair enough, Walker, I get your meaning. You're trying to explain to me that the US is a theocracy, which explains why so many Americans are such an immoral murderous gang of bandits who stand willing to trample all over the human rights of anybody who doesn't agree with them.

It seems that you and I have nothing to argue about after all.

Peace.

Ansiktsburk
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Central Scandinavia

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Ansiktsburk » Tue Dec 08, 2015 9:13 am

Walker wrote:The question man makes an assertion.

You're branching out.

You could stop there and be a bigot.

Or, you could expand your awareness sufficiently to form principles applicable to man ... perhaps.

You'd be venturing into philosophy.

How to get there from here ... hmmmm.
Principles might be all right, as long as those principles is not taken for an excuse to do wrong.

I think that most people agree that you have the right to use deadly violence in order to defend your or others lives. If you are unfortunate to live in a community where you feel that this is a probable possibility(and in that case you might wonder about your community). And you might argue that it's not worse to kill a deer for meat than to buy a beef at the grocery store(No one I know hunts, I have not heard too many arguments for or against hunting. But I cannot argue that it is wrong to hunt when I love to eat Caeur de Filet Provecale ). But does anyone think that you have the right to kill someone because he is in your premises?
When you, Henry self-defended (killed? Wounded? Threatened?) yourself anainst the trespassers, was the Issue to protect your life?

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:37 pm

Walker wrote:
Obvious Leo wrote:I was wondering how long it would take before somebody brought god into the conversation. In the US and the middle east god and guns go hand in hand.
Best to recognize reality, and build from there. Much more productive than butterflies.

The U.S. Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence, must be read in conjunction, for proper comprehension.

Sort of like the golden rule people like to quote.

That is the reality. And that's enough to work with.
The Constitution makes NO provision for the unrestricted right to bear arms for all citizens.
The Constitution does not proscribe the registration of fire-arms.
The Constitution does make provision for a Militia to keep weapons.

It is widely understood that criminal activity can lead to restrictions on some rights.

It does not take a person of high intelligence to realise that there is no legitimate use for assault rifles in a domestic or hunting context; only criminals would want to own one.

User avatar
UniversalAlien
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:27 am
Contact:

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by UniversalAlien » Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:51 pm

Now let us deal with some facts - facts that the 'gun grabbers' refuse to accept:

I quote the following:

Murder by Gun Control
by L. Neil Smith

...........Gun control may have felt like a nice, warm, fuzzy idea to its advocates back in the 1960s. However today, owing to a great deal of serious legal and historical scholarship — and a series of horrifying but highly educational events — anyone who wishes to violate the fundamental covenant on which this nation is based, by attempting to outlaw personal weapons, has to get past three extremely inconvenient but absolutely incontrovertible facts:
(1) Every year, in this nation of more than a quarter billion individuals, a few thousand (three quarters of them suicides) are killed with firearms, while _millions_ of Americans successfully use personal weapons to save themselves and others from injury or death. Guns save many, many times more lives than they take.
(2) In every jurisdiction that has made it even microscopically easier for individuals to carry weapons, violent crime rates have plummeted by double-digit percentages. Vermont, where no permission of any kind is required to carry a gun, is named in many respectable surveys as the safest state to live in.
(3) More telling and urgent, every episode of genocidal mass murder in history has been preceded by a period of intense disarming of the civil population, usually with "public safety" or "national security" as an excuse. According to Amnesty International — hardly a gang of right wing crazies — in the 20th century alone (in events entirely separate from war), governments have slaughtered more than a hundred million people, usually their own citizens.
The U.S. is far from immune. Look up "Operation Keelhaul".
Clearly, if those millions had been armed, they couldn't have been murdered by their own governments. And if the governments hadn't known where all the weapons were and who possessed them, the people couldn't have been disarmed. It follows, then, that no amount of gun control — especially "soft" measures like registering guns or gun owners — is reasonable or safe. Those who tremble at the idea of personal weapons — "hoplophobes" is the diagnostic term — are fond of saying that guns are made for only one purpose. Well, gun control serves only one purpose, too — the incapacitation and extermination of whole peoples...........
Quote source and rest of article:
http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-the ... 82531.html

And another fact and I quote:

"FREE MEN OWN GUNS - SLAVES DON'T"

Walker
Posts: 6892
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Right to bear arms for the purpose of domestic resistance.

Post by Walker » Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:33 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:Fair enough, Walker, I get your meaning. You're trying to explain to me that the US is a theocracy, which explains why so many Americans are such an immoral murderous gang of bandits who stand willing to trample all over the human rights of anybody who doesn't agree with them.

It seems that you and I have nothing to argue about after all.

Peace.
The judgements expressed in your words show that you live in a violent and antagonistic world, and that you call this world of yours, peace.

Or perhaps peace is your hope. If that’s the case, well then shit in one hand and hope in the other … and see which one fills up first.

And it obviously starts now, with your next movement. Speak into your hand so that it taps the keys. Is it to be true peace expressed, or the world that you know.

8)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Skepdick and 3 guests