Be sure to vote, I am curious where most atheists stand on this issue.

Views: 3085

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Becca, I agree that the military/government will always have the bigger guns.

Organized militaries tend to lose when they're fighting guerillas, as America lost in Viet Nam.

Well, bears are my favorite animals, especially Grizzly bears. So, I am all for me having the arms of a Grizzly bear replacing my own or at least the left arm. :)

I have to laugh at those comments that take the line that the populace need to be armed in order to oppose armed oppression by the state. Oppression of the people starts long before the armed force stage comes in, please go and look at history. Oppression is carried out via the government taking control of communication (media) either directly or indirectly (suppression of stories under laws of the state - the Patriot Act for instance) and the state monitoring of communication as is happening under the ever expanding NSA, DHS and FBI. The control of information to the public (SOPA etc) It is done via control of the control of food production and the movement of food, I suggest you take a look at the new Food Safety law in the US, some rather interesting clauses there. It is done by the control of personal wealth and the flow of money, here I would suggest your governments wide ranging powers to sieze any asset they even think maybe due to illegal activity would fall under this particular control, but watch out for new controls on the movement of money out of the USA in the coming year. Of course they already monitor all money movement to muslim countries from the USA.

If you think owning a gun is going to stop you being oppressed you are wrong, the oppression has already been in progress for over a decade and its drip, drip, drip implementation will continue so that by the time most realise it has already happened having the right to bare arms will be a mute point.

Judith vd R

Oppression does exist in almost every society on this planet and we have our fair share. When the shit hits the fan in a very bad way I do want to retain my collection of firearms. They could be instrumental in one's survival in a world turned upside down. Rocks, slingshots, and spears won't past the effectiveness mustard.

Judith, you recognize a few realities that many people don't but the oppression began earlier than you say.

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and others at the 1787 Federal Convention provided for oppression by America's wealthy. You can read their words in Max Farrand's Records of the Federal Convention of 1787. His three volumes can be found in many large public libraries and the last time I did a search Amazon had them in paperback.

I agree that owning personal firearms will do little to prevent a heavily armed government from becoming a dictatorship and suppressing freedoms.

We here in the US are already under a multitude of laws and regulations defining what we can or can't do.  While many of these regulations are necessary, there are those which are not.  In my opinion the Patriot Act (what a name)  is a law designed to take away any rights the government deems necessary.  Congress passed it in the hysteria which swept the country following 9/11.  It is a law of unintended (maybe not) consequences.  It makes habeas corpus a joke..

I believe there was a quote from Thomas Jefferson on the subject that said something along the lines of "the second amendment won't be necessary until the government tries to take it." Or at least that's what it essentially implied. There's a reason loose gun laws lower crime rates. I'm all for class licenses and such, but registration and bannings are a joke.

What about the right to arm bears?

Yes, I think that should happen. Please make that happen.

I do not own a gun because a travel so much. But once my traveling dies down, I do plan to purchase two handguns. One near my bed and one in my kitchen area because I am in my kitchen most of the time. 

These are points that I agree with.

Why have we let our government legislate us into becoming potential victims? Criminals have guns while law-abiding citizens are left helpless. 


Any gun control that restricts law-abiding citizens is ridiculous - we're not the people who commit crimes.

Finally, police cannot protect citizens, and even if they could, they do not have an obligation to do so. One must accept responsibility for one's own security.

all agreed. and someone who trains "peace officers" in the states...the ones in my area wont be called. they cant hit the broad side of a barn and will just accidentally shoot my wife, dog, turtle, fish tank.... then sprinkle some crack on all of us and say they stopped a drug deal

Sounds like the problem, in your area, isn't a question of gun-control or -ownership but an issue with a) a poorly motivated/corrupt police force OR b) a big case of anti-police confirmation bias.


© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service