Runboard.com
Слава Україні!

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3  4 

 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Tom Brokaw - I'm a Pro-Gun Hunter. Las Vegas Proves Gun Rights Need Limits


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

You may say someone doesn't need a car but of all things Americans wouldn't give up it would be a car, especially those who live in the burbs and more so those that are aged.I think most would give up food first before driving and a need is far different than a want. Infringing does not mean no regulation, we also infringe on driving rights, that is why they give you a handbook, make you take a test, have a license, a registration with plate and a title for ownership. States that do not, Virginia, New Hampshire and Mississippi, all of which have regulation identifying car and driver. A cop can't immediately or any other way identify a gun if its been wiped clean.



Nonsense.
Most people would prefer good mass transit instead.
It would save money, be safer, and more reliable.
The trolly cars on the 1950s were not decommissioned and burned because they were not popular, but because GM, STD Oil, Firestone, etc. bought the companies out and destroyed them.

And federal gun law IS an infringement since clearly the founders gave all weapons jurisdiction to the states.
There is no "right" to drive.
Driving is a difficult thing that many people are incapable of doing.

Any cop can immediately identify if a gun is stolen because it has serial number on it.
All gun sales are recorded.
10/15/2017, 4:30 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Tom Brokaw - I'm a Pro-Gun Hunter. Las Vegas Proves Gun Rights Need Limits


quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

You forget that humans are chaotic by nature.
Attempting to control, govern, regulate, and make safe their existence would be to make life meaningless, and you would have to put them into a zoo.-Rigby



I disagree. Humans by nature aren't very chaotic. They are very much into organizing themselves into political groups which aim at generating security and avoiding chaos. Even primitive tribes display that behaviour pattern.

quote:

This was the basis of an episode of "Star Trek" where a computer decides humans have to be protected from their own disorder.
The computer has androids that look human but each wear a number tag.
Spock paralyzes 2 female looking androids by saying to one he loves her, but to her duplicate that he hated her.



I don't remember that episode.

quote:

The defense department of government is purely against foreign invasion. There is no federal jurisdiction for internal defense at all.



Then how do you explain the FDA and the CDC?

Besides, it would be a very poor government indeed if it allowed its citizens to all be harmed or killed by some sort of internal threat while only worrying about external ones.

quote:

It is impossible to even remotely protect people by removing the means of doing harm.



Maybe but our government keeps trying except when it comes to various firearms.

quote:

That genie was out of the bottle when we started inventing technology.
That is why I mentioned the harm done by corrupt police and military.
Clearly if removing weapons were at all helpful, the first people we would remove them from are the police and military, who have the longest history of abusing weapons and harming people. If you can't bring yourself to disarm police and military, and surely it is far more illogical to try to disarm average citizens, who not only can be trusted far more than police or military, but need to be armed far more, as the last defense.



I have no problem with taking guns away from the police and leaving them with other means of self defense. They shoot and kill far too many unarmed citizens.

quote:

It is not trying to defend people from gun fire that makes it a nanny state, but the idea that average people are the source of danger. That essentially is treason in a democratic republic. Average people are supposed to be the ultimate in whom we trust.



It's kind of hard to trust them when they do such a poor job on juries. They'd be a lot more trustworthy if they weren't so biased in favor of men over women.

quote:

It certainly is not the ruling class or their armed servants, the police and military, that can ever be trusted.
Its trying to suggest the wolves keep order in the hen house. Totally irrational.



They obviously can't be trusted, at least not all of them, but we still need some sort of internal investigation organizations to track down criminals. And our police detectives fairly often serve that function very well. They are generally not the ones running around shooting people. For that matter most cops don't shoot people.




That is wrong. People organize into social groups so they can avoid social chaos, but that is so they can individual be chaotic.
There is no point in having social order if that inhibits personal chaotic behavior.
Forced conformity is anathema to all human individuals. People want the streets to be uniform and for them not be be killed when walking down the streets, but they do not want imposed religions, political beliefs, lack of self defense, etc.
They do NOT want to be kept like animals in a zoo, even if they would be safer that way.

The "Star Trek" episode I refer to is "I, Mudd".


The FDA and CDC actually are not legal, and should only have advisory capabilities.

Internal threats are to be entirely under state jurisdiction.

The federal has no jurisdiction to remove firearms, and any attempt to do so can only make society far worse. Gun control = dictatorship. There can be no other purpose. Gun control is to make only the government in control of all means of political power, the opposite of what a republic requires.

How well average people do on juries is not relevant, because often aspects of law can be complex, or some individuals can be very deceptive. The point is that average people will be more likely to not murder for money than hired enforcers like police and military will. So there is just no safe way to do gun control. It can only begin a transition to dictatorship.

Cops shoot people more than anyone else shoots people. And police do it due to what those who pay them want. It is never in defense, because police are never deliberate targets of theft or murder.



This is a clip from my favorite episode of Star Trek, "Errand of Mercy," a much better episode than "I, Mudd." It's about some aliens who reluctantly decide to provide some "gun control" to prevent a massive war. Neither Kirk nor the Klingon leader were happy about it but they didn't have any choice in the matter.

The aliens didn't want to do what they did because they didn't want to interfere in the lives of other beings but they did so because their freedom was less important than saving lives. A very good episode of Star Trek that illustrates why gun control makes sense. It is a reduction of the power of misguided as well as evil people to kill others.

10/17/2017, 10:01 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Tom Brokaw - I'm a Pro-Gun Hunter. Las Vegas Proves Gun Rights Need Limits


quote:

Philer wrote:

...

This is a clip from my favorite episode of Star Trek, "Errand of Mercy," a much better episode than "I, Mudd." It's about some aliens who reluctantly decide to provide some "gun control" to prevent a massive war. Neither Kirk nor the Klingon leader were happy about it but they didn't have any choice in the matter.

The aliens didn't want to do what they did because they didn't want to interfere in the lives of other beings but they did so because their freedom was less important than saving lives. A very good episode of Star Trek that illustrates why gun control makes sense. It is a reduction of the power of misguided as well as evil people to kill others.




Yes that was a great "Star Trek" episode, but is nothing at all like gun control.

The US government is NOT the Organians, who happened to not only be intelligent but also benevolent.

Look at the track record, millions murdered in Vietnam, Iraq, etc., the war on drugs, millions imprisoned, asset forfeiture, unfair IRS regulations, no public health care, outrageous college tuition, etc.
The government is far below the standards of fairness, justice, etc., than the average person. In fact, it is clear another revolution will be necessary every 300 years or so.

Sure it would be nice if such a benevolent and powerful force could make society peaceful.
But that is the opposite of gun control.
Gun control is the worst of the greedy, corrupt, and evil, preventing any means of dissent. Gun control in this society, is how you enforce slavery.
10/17/2017, 10:27 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Tom Brokaw - I'm a Pro-Gun Hunter. Las Vegas Proves Gun Rights Need Limits


quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

quote:

Philer wrote:

...

This is a clip from my favorite episode of Star Trek, "Errand of Mercy," a much better episode than "I, Mudd." It's about some aliens who reluctantly decide to provide some "gun control" to prevent a massive war. Neither Kirk nor the Klingon leader were happy about it but they didn't have any choice in the matter.

The aliens didn't want to do what they did because they didn't want to interfere in the lives of other beings but they did so because their freedom was less important than saving lives. A very good episode of Star Trek that illustrates why gun control makes sense. It is a reduction of the power of misguided as well as evil people to kill others.




Yes that was a great "Star Trek" episode, but is nothing at all like gun control.

The US government is NOT the Organians, who happened to not only be intelligent but also benevolent.

Look at the track record, millions murdered in Vietnam, Iraq, etc., the war on drugs, millions imprisoned, asset forfeiture, unfair IRS regulations, no public health care, outrageous college tuition, etc.
The government is far below the standards of fairness, justice, etc., than the average person. In fact, it is clear another revolution will be necessary every 300 years or so.

Sure it would be nice if such a benevolent and powerful force could make society peaceful.
But that is the opposite of gun control.
Gun control is the worst of the greedy, corrupt, and evil, preventing any means of dissent. Gun control in this society, is how you enforce slavery.



I'm very aware that our government is nothing like the Organians, Rigby. The fact that it doesn't practice effective gun control illustrates that fact all by itself. You don't even have to refer to all the unnecessary wars.

My argument is for making our government more like the Organians, not less.

10/17/2017, 10:37 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Tom Brokaw - I'm a Pro-Gun Hunter. Las Vegas Proves Gun Rights Need Limits


quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

quote:

Philer wrote:

...

This is a clip from my favorite episode of Star Trek, "Errand of Mercy," a much better episode than "I, Mudd." It's about some aliens who reluctantly decide to provide some "gun control" to prevent a massive war. Neither Kirk nor the Klingon leader were happy about it but they didn't have any choice in the matter.

The aliens didn't want to do what they did because they didn't want to interfere in the lives of other beings but they did so because their freedom was less important than saving lives. A very good episode of Star Trek that illustrates why gun control makes sense. It is a reduction of the power of misguided as well as evil people to kill others.




Yes that was a great "Star Trek" episode, but is nothing at all like gun control.

The US government is NOT the Organians, who happened to not only be intelligent but also benevolent.

Look at the track record, millions murdered in Vietnam, Iraq, etc., the war on drugs, millions imprisoned, asset forfeiture, unfair IRS regulations, no public health care, outrageous college tuition, etc.
The government is far below the standards of fairness, justice, etc., than the average person. In fact, it is clear another revolution will be necessary every 300 years or so.

Sure it would be nice if such a benevolent and powerful force could make society peaceful.
But that is the opposite of gun control.
Gun control is the worst of the greedy, corrupt, and evil, preventing any means of dissent. Gun control in this society, is how you enforce slavery.



I'm very aware that our government is nothing like the Organians, Rigby. The fact that it doesn't practice effective gun control illustrates that fact all by itself. You don't even have to refer to all the unnecessary wars.

My argument is for making our government more like the Organians, not less.




My argument is that government can never be like the Organians, and the closest you can get is to weaken government as much as possible, so that individuals will have the most influence. That is because individuals are relatively good usually, and all government always inherently become bad, if they don't already start that way.

Did the Organians even have government at all?
I don't think so.
Ideally the goal should be to make government totally unnecessary.
Tipping the balance of power to government, away from average individuals, is putting the fox in control of the henhouse.

The only reason we need government at all is because we need it to balance out dangers from corporations. But government is a double edged sword.

Last edited by Rigby5, 10/18/2017, 5:43 am
10/18/2017, 5:41 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Tom Brokaw - I'm a Pro-Gun Hunter. Las Vegas Proves Gun Rights Need Limits


quote:

My argument is that government can never be like the Organians, and the closest you can get is to weaken government as much as possible, so that individuals will have the most influence. That is because individuals are relatively good usually, and all government always inherently become bad, if they don't already start that way.-Rigby



My view is that government needs to assume a similar benevolent role to that of the Organians since it has the most power in any given society.

As for individuals being relatively good, governments consist of individuals. And those governments are probably only going to be as good as the individuals in the society that they govern.

quote:

Did the Organians even have government at all?
I don't think so.
Ideally the goal should be to make government totally unnecessary.
Tipping the balance of power to government, away from average individuals, is putting the fox in control of the henhouse.



The balance of power always tips that way if the government has the power to govern. A government with no power to control a society is not really much of a government.

And while the Organians didn't have a government, we do. And we also need one.

But it needs to be a benevolent one like the Organians. One which doesn't like restricting freedom but does so only when that becomes necessary to prevent things like wars and social chaos rather than creating those kinds of problems. Our government does a lot to generate havoc and problems rather than preventing them.

10/18/2017, 9:00 am Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4 





You are not logged in (login)