Just a question to our resident Americans

[Skepdick]

This is your 2nd amendment yes?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."4

I know the Swiss are but how many gun owners in America are in well regulated militias?

The key distinction most people observe here is that it doesn't say

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the Militia to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I think it succinctly addresses the tension between the needs of the State (security) and the rights of individuals (freedom).

It states the default position - individual rights should never be trampled in pursuit of collective needs.

[Walker]

Execution is punishment.

Abortion is not punishment.

Abortion is Life-Change Denial.

Where does the shooter of the abortion performer fit in? Is it punishment or is it Life-Change Denial? After all, the shooting was not sanctioned by the state.

If the shooter of the abortion-performer is punished by the state, is it not wrong therefore to shoot abortion performers? Would it not be the job of the state to punish them? After all, you get charged for murder if you kill as a vigilante in any circumstance. Capital punishment is reserved for the state to perform, no?

And because the state is separate from the church, does the state employee have the religious sin lifted from him... by what power? The state is not religion. The state has no capacity in religious issues. The executioner offends god's commandment. He will burn in hellfire forever. Who wants that?

Neither abortionist nor executioner will ever find peace in self-justification, e.g. denying the truth of aliveness, which is one reason why it’s omitted from guilty pleas, redemption, and absolution.

[Sculptor]

This is your 2nd amendment yes?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."4

I know the Swiss are but how many gun owners in America are in well regulated militias?

How many own flintlocks?

[Skepdick]

This is your 2nd amendment yes?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."4

I know the Swiss are but how many gun owners in America are in well regulated militias?

How many own flintlocks?

If the 2nd amendment is about access to flintlocks then the 1st amendment is about access to the Gutenberg press.

[Sculptor]

This is your 2nd amendment yes?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."4

I know the Swiss are but how many gun owners in America are in well regulated militias?

How many own flintlocks?

If the 2nd amendment is about access to flintlocks then the 1st amendment is about access to the Gutenberg press.

And when Russia is free to tell lies to influence the US election you'll say nothing.
ALL freedoms have limits.
Without limits then you have the right to own a nuclear powered tank.

[Skepdick]

And when Russia is free to tell lies to influence the US election you'll say nothing.

I can say very many thing. I can signal virtue. Outrage. I can protest. I can say something like 'Russia, this is preposterous and undermines the spirit of democracy! Bad Russia! DON'T DO THAT AGAIN!'

My rhetoric has exactly zero effect on Russia/Putin's decision-making process - wolves don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep.

You are a pretty naive sheep if you think how any of this works...

ALL freedoms have limits.

All man-made limits are artificial. Unless they can be enforced. IN PRACTICE - they are just lip service.

The fact that murder is illegal doesn't stop me from murdering you.

Without limits then you have the right to own a nuclear powered tank.

The fact that you impose such limits doesn't mean I can't build my own tank and enrich my own uranium. What I do with my own property is none of your business.

Yes, I have the 'right' to own a nuclear-powered tank - by virtue of your inability to stop me. I have no particular desire to do so, but you seem to think you are entitled to interfere with my life in the event I actually procured, or even built one. If such is the case - I have only one thing left to say to you.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

I need not justify my absolute freedom to you. You need to justify your authority over me. You have none.

[henry quirk]

Well put and absolutely correct.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

And when Russia is free to tell lies to influence the US election you'll say nothing.

I can say very many thing. I can signal virtue. Outrage. I can protest. I can say something like 'Russia, this is preposterous and undermines the spirit of democracy! Bad Russia! DON'T DO THAT AGAIN!'

My rhetoric has exactly zero effect on Russia/Putin's decision-making process - wolves don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep.

You are a pretty naive sheep if you think how any of this works...

ALL freedoms have limits.

All man-made limits are artificial. Unless they can be enforced. IN PRACTICE - they are just lip service.

The fact that murder is illegal doesn't stop me from murdering you.

Without limits then you have the right to own a nuclear powered tank.

The fact that you impose such limits doesn't mean I can't build my own tank and enrich my own uranium. What I do with my own property is none of your business.

Yes, I have the 'right' to own a nuclear-powered tank - by virtue of your inability to stop me. I have no particular desire to do so, but you seem to think you are entitled to interfere with my life in the event I actually procured, or even built one. If such is the case - I have only one thing left to say to you.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

I need not justify my absolute freedom to you. You need to justify your authority over me. You have none.

You would be stopped by someone, whether it's Govt. or your neighbours. You don't even know what 'freedom' means. It doesn't necessarily always mean something positive either.
And yes, it is someone else's fucking business because it affects others. If you don't give a fuck about neighbours (or anyone but yourself) then you are a sociopath who deserves no consideration whatsoever. Is there NOTHING that stupid yanks don't misunderstand and misconstrue?
If you want 'freedom' then go and live in the wild, where you aren't going to harm other humans. You might not feel so 'free' though when a hungry grizzly bear decides it wants the 'freedom' to eat you.

[Skepdick]

You would be stopped by someone, whether it's Govt. or your neighbours.

Have you heard of the non-aggression principle? No? Your problem.

You don't even know what 'freedom' means.

I know what it means to me, and that's all that matters. Your definition is not my obligation.

And yes, it is someone else's fucking business because it affects others.

How does the contents of your household affect your neighbours in any way?

If you want 'freedom' then go and live in the wild, where you aren't going to harm other humans.

I am not harming any humans where I live right now. You sound a little paranoid. Misanthropic even.

If you don't give a fuck about neighbours, then you are a sociopath who deserves no consideration whatsoever

I give a fuck about my neighbours. I give a fuck about you. I want what is best for you - exactly like I want what is best for me.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[Sculptor]

And when Russia is free to tell lies to influence the US election you'll say nothing.

I can say very many thing. I can signal virtue. Outrage. I can protest. I can say something like 'Russia, this is preposterous and undermines the spirit of democracy! Bad Russia! DON'T DO THAT AGAIN!'

My rhetoric has exactly zero effect on Russia/Putin's decision-making process - wolves don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep.

You are a pretty naive sheep if you think how any of this works...

ALL freedoms have limits.

All man-made limits are artificial. Unless they can be enforced. IN PRACTICE - they are just lip service.

The fact that murder is illegal doesn't stop me from murdering you.

Without limits then you have the right to own a nuclear powered tank.

The fact that you impose such limits doesn't mean I can't build my own tank and enrich my own uranium. What I do with my own property is none of your business.

Yes, I have the 'right' to own a nuclear-powered tank - by virtue of your inability to stop me. I have no particular desire to do so, but you seem to think you are entitled to interfere with my life in the event I actually procured, or even built one. If such is the case - I have only one thing left to say to you.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

I need not justify my absolute freedom to you. You need to justify your authority over me. You have none.

All your bluster and bollocks is of no effect.
Does not change the fact that the 2nd amendment was designed for families to keep a flintlock against the time when they were called for to assist the militia.

No right exists for anyone to own weapons in the US beyond that.
If the USA were not peopled by morons it would not be top of the league of prison population; gun accidents and murder.

Keep you guns and your stupidity.

[Skepdick]

Does not change the fact that the 2nd amendment was designed for families to keep a flintlock against the time when they were called for to assist the militia.

The history says differently.

No right exists for anyone to own weapons in the US beyond that.

You understand that 'rights' are a social construct, yes?

Your right to life doesn't exist. It's just what we SAY. We, humans, have mutually agreed that we will cherish and value human life.
And while I cherish mine - I also want the tools to protect it. From people who aren't true to their word.

My guns are how I protect the rights we have all agreed to.

Which rights do my guns protect? All of them! The pen is not mightier than the sword. Violence is the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived.

If the USA were not peopled by morons it would not be top of the league of prison population; gun accidents and murder.

That's another lie. The USA is not even in the Top 50 when it comes to murder rate.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... icide_rate

Keep you guns and your stupidity.

I am keeping the guns. You are keeping the stupidity.

[-1-]

Neither abortionist nor executioner will ever find peace in self-justification, e.g. denying the truth of aliveness, which is one reason why it’s omitted from guilty pleas, redemption, and absolution.

Let me be clear on your position. So the abortionist or the executioner will not find redemption or absoultion, but the murderer will.

So the murderer will find redemption, absolution, and he will sit on the right of Jesus in Heavens because the murderer is not an aboritonist or an executioner.

But there is no difference between the murderer and the abortionist and the executioner in the sense that they all commit the sin lain out in the commandment, "Do not kill". They equally contravene this law. Yet they receive different treatment, you claim.

Why do they receive different treatment, if their sin is the same? This is the question you need to struggle with.

[Walker]

Your attempts at projection are crude and weak.
Your concept of heaven is superfluous.

Neither will the murderer find peace through self-justification.

Neither will the man-slaughterer, the depraved indifferent, nor the careless. Neither will the accomplice to murder, abortion, execution, manslaughter, depraved indifference, or carelessness find peace through self-justification.

Neither will the dishonest.

To be clear, better an honest discussion than projections of your own dualities.

[henry quirk]

I own a gun, it's mine. On the day I deprive another of his life, liberty, or property without justification, folks can gimme grief. Till then: my gun ain't anybody's business.

[Sculptor]

Does not change the fact that the 2nd amendment was designed for families to keep a flintlock against the time when they were called for to assist the militia.

The history says differently.

No right exists for anyone to own weapons in the US beyond that.

You understand that 'rights' are a social construct, yes?

You have shown a complete disregard for law, that is why you don't count for a person worthy of argumentation.
And it also means you don't get to hide behind the 2nd amendment too.