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

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

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

Re: Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Mon Dec 07, 2015 5:33 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
henry quirk wrote: "You register your car because it is a dangerous weapon, and means you can get it back if stolen. There is no downside to this unless you want to commit crime with your car, or steal cars."

Don't know how things run where you are, but cars are not registered in the U.S. because they're weapons.
You objection is not relevant. You just want to avoid thinking about the real issue.
Cars are responsible for more deaths than any gun.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4965
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Dec 07, 2015 5:49 pm

"You objection is not relevant"

Then it wasn't relevant, or accurate, for you to claim registration is about cars being dangerous weapons.

#

"Cars are responsible for more deaths than any gun."

I know this. Still doesn't make your claim as to why cars are registered, accurate.


As for the 'issue' (guns, gun ownership, gun violence): I am addressing it, as one person in the midst of some very public and conflicting agendas.

The issue is not simple, the solution will not be simple, no matter what either side says.

The problem is not really guns, but what drives some folks to do jackassery with guns (or pressure cooker bombs or knives or...).

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11962
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

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

Post by Arising_uk » Mon Dec 07, 2015 8:35 pm

marjoram_blues wrote:...

I would say that the law certainly enabled the couple to 'bear arms' but even without this facilitative law, guns can be obtained illegally and there would be links to 'underground groups'. ...
From what I read you don't have to buy them illegally in the US to not be subject to checks, you just have to buy them privately which is not illegal. Now given there are 300,000,000 odd of them I guess finding assault rifles probably not such a chore.

marjoram_blues
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:50 pm

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

Post by marjoram_blues » Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:19 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
marjoram_blues wrote:...

I would say that the law certainly enabled the couple to 'bear arms' but even without this facilitative law, guns can be obtained illegally and there would be links to 'underground groups'. ...
From what I read you don't have to buy them illegally in the US to not be subject to checks, you just have to buy them privately which is not illegal. Now given there are 300,000,000 odd of them I guess finding assault rifles probably not such a chore.
Yeah, seems like it's a whole lot easier to get a gun than have access to health services for diagnosis and treatment of mental health issues such as paranoid schizophrenia.

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

Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Mon Dec 07, 2015 11:21 pm

henry quirk wrote: The problem is not really guns, but what drives some folks to do jackassery with guns (or pressure cooker bombs or knives or...).
True jackasses who'd rather let morons have guns than face registration of their own guns is the problem you are right for once.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4965
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:13 am

Okay, I'm a jackass.

I can live with that.

Better a jackass, I think, than terminally niave.

Seems you believe rulers (elected, appointed, or inherited) can more noble than the ruled.

As you like...history disagrees with you, but, as you like.

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

Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:19 am

henry quirk wrote:Okay, I'm a jackass.

I can live with that.

Better a jackass, I think, than terminally niave.

Seems you believe rulers (elected, appointed, or inherited) can more noble than the ruled.

As you like...history disagrees with you, but, as you like.
I realise that reality is something you seem to struggle with... but...

Reality is on my side of the pond. It's really only idiot Americans that have this problem.
Last edited by Hobbes' Choice on Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4965
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:25 am

Have it your way, veg tax, I mean, Hobbes.

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 3:18 am

Henry. If you decide to keep a dog as a pet in the US is it necessary to register this animal with the local authorities? In Australia this is compulsory and I've never heard a dog-owner complain about it because it is universally accepted as being a feature of responsible citizenship. In fact there are a small number of people who are forbidden to keep a dog for various reasons and this is also seen as fair enough. Does your country have similar regulations?

Walker
Posts: 6844
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 6:44 am

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

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 7:15 am

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.

Walker
Posts: 6844
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 7:19 am

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.

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 7:22 am

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?

Walker
Posts: 6844
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 7:25 am

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. That's what is interesting, to you.

Your question pertains to your topic.

So, expound.

Make it interesting to me.

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 7:28 am

Walker wrote:I brought up philosophy.
It was you that brought up the subject of god, not me. What the fuck has god got to do with philosophy?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests