Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by ds0110
100 years ago it was not "every man for himself" or whatever thunderdome scenario you were imagining. Life went on without so much govt in peoples lives. Economy flourished, people were fine. Civil rights was going to happen regardless of what economic policies we adopted. We do not need all these unnecessary laws regulating our everyday life so that a politician or LEO can keep a job they shouldnt have in the first place.
Its our right as americans to own these things. Especially if we ship 50$ billion of them to pakistan, saudi arabia, (EACH - this week) and elsewhere around the world we are one of the biggest arms exporters. If the other countries can have them, so should we. Americans should be able to buy everything foreign armies can buy, plus more...not the other way around.
The situation of our military sending arms that are prohibited to US citizens, to foreign countries that later on illegally resale them to US citizens at a huge markup...is wrong. That major source of funding for foreign organized crime is only present bc of current gun laws.
It doesnt matter what you think people need or dont need. Thats freedom. If you dont want to buy something, then dont, but dont try to tell other people what they have the right to buy, its not going to stop anyone from buying what they want, when the supply is clearly never going away. Guns are here to stay. Forget legislating them out of existence, that wont happen. This includes all "illegal" guns. Someone will profit. The question is do you want the mexican/russian cartels to profit from it, or an american in a gunstore? One will sell to felons, one wont.
And to your RPG concern...the cost would be prohibitive, much like if you want to buy a .50 cal sniper rifle today youre going to pay as much as you would for some cars new, then $10+ per shot.
Again, regardless of the laws, if I want a fully auto ak or m16, or even hand grenades or suppressors....Its not hard at all for me to buy them...and it doesnt come from a gun show/store or private purchase where there are checks to see if im a felon. It comes from a "guy" just like any illegal drug would. That stuff is actually easier for me to buy than it is to get a semi-auto .22 from a "legit" channel such as a gun show. (no bg check, no ffl, no fingerprint records, dont even give him a license) So the gun laws didnt make it harder for me to buy "illegal" weapons, they made it easier. (bc now theres big profit in learning basic gunsmithing or importing foreign military surplus) The laws provide a new way for criminals to make money.
The socialists in govt. know its not the right thing to do, and that socialism is not popular. This does not stop them from passing socialist policies to benefit their foreign lobby (bribery) interests while they hide behind their democrat or republican title. Corruption is what happens when you have big govt.
So you think everyone should have rocket launchers?
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by ds0110
100 years ago it was not "every man for himself" or whatever thunderdome scenario you were imagining. Life went on without so much govt in peoples lives. Economy flourished, people were fine. Civil rights was going to happen regardless of what economic policies we adopted. We do not need all these unnecessary laws regulating our everyday life so that a politician or LEO can keep a job they shouldnt have in the first place.
Its our right as americans to own these things. Especially if we ship 50$ billion of them to pakistan, saudi arabia, (EACH - this week) and elsewhere around the world we are one of the biggest arms exporters. If the other countries can have them, so should we. Americans should be able to buy everything foreign armies can buy, plus more...not the other way around.
The situation of our military sending arms that are prohibited to US citizens, to foreign countries that later on illegally resale them to US citizens at a huge markup...is wrong. That major source of funding for foreign organized crime is only present bc of current gun laws.
It doesnt matter what you think people need or dont need. Thats freedom. If you dont want to buy something, then dont, but dont try to tell other people what they have the right to buy, its not going to stop anyone from buying what they want, when the supply is clearly never going away. Guns are here to stay. Forget legislating them out of existence, that wont happen. This includes all "illegal" guns. Someone will profit. The question is do you want the mexican/russian cartels to profit from it, or an american in a gunstore? One will sell to felons, one wont.
And to your RPG concern...the cost would be prohibitive, much like if you want to buy a .50 cal sniper rifle today youre going to pay as much as you would for some cars new, then $10+ per shot.
Again, regardless of the laws, if I want a fully auto ak or m16, or even hand grenades or suppressors....Its not hard at all for me to buy them...and it doesnt come from a gun show/store or private purchase where there are checks to see if im a felon. It comes from a "guy" just like any illegal drug would. That stuff is actually easier for me to buy than it is to get a semi-auto .22 from a "legit" channel such as a gun show. (no bg check, no ffl, no fingerprint records, dont even give him a license) So the gun laws didnt make it harder for me to buy "illegal" weapons, they made it easier. (bc now theres big profit in learning basic gunsmithing or importing foreign military surplus) The laws provide a new way for criminals to make money.
The socialists in govt. know its not the right thing to do, and that socialism is not popular. This does not stop them from passing socialist policies to benefit their foreign lobby (bribery) interests while they hide behind their democrat or republican title. Corruption is what happens when you have big govt.
No they dont. The American Dental Association?? You can have both civil rights and libertarian policies. One does not somehow cancel the other.
They're not going to listen to you. It's like casting pearls before swine. And the sad part is that they are convinced that they are mainstream and we are extremists. The worm will turn, as it always does.
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by senorx12562
They're not going to listen to you. It's like casting pearls before swine. And the sad part is that they are convinced that they are mainstream and we are extremists. The worm will turn, as it always does.
You ARE extremists, sorry. To think that citizens should be able to buy military grade arms is nuts. We have enough problems as it is now.
I mean, yeah, sure if Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have them we should too! They also have public hangings, no rights for women, and forced religion. Woohoo! Let's do that here too. And any guesses as to what the penalty for weed is in Saudi?
Yes, I was referring to the Americans with Disabilities Act. And no, civil rights were not "going to happen anyway." Maybe in another couple hundred years. But there was absolutely nothing short of the power of the federal government that could have forced the Southern states to give voting rights to their minority citizens. Indeed, the whole idea of protecting the minority from the majority is the downfall of libertarian philosophy. There's just nothing that will make those changes happen in the fairytale world libertarians inhabit, and when asked about it, their response is to spout platitudes about how things would change eventually, when anyone familiar with American history (or indeed world history) knows that isn't true.
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by donniedorko
You ARE extremists, sorry. To think that citizens should be able to buy military grade arms is nuts. We have enough problems as it is now.
I mean, yeah, sure if Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have them we should too! They also have public hangings, no rights for women, and forced religion. Woohoo! Let's do that here too. And any guesses as to what the penalty for weed is in Saudi?
Yes, I was referring to the Americans with Disabilities Act. And no, civil rights were not "going to happen anyway." Maybe in another couple hundred years. But there was absolutely nothing short of the power of the federal government that could have forced the Southern states to give voting rights to their minority citizens. Indeed, the whole idea of protecting the minority from the majority is the downfall of libertarian philosophy. There's just nothing that will make those changes happen in the fairytale world libertarians inhabit, and when asked about it, their response is to spout platitudes about how things would change eventually, when anyone familiar with American history (or indeed world history) knows that isn't true.
So you DO admit civil rights was going to happen anyway...
You were lied to. To think the war of northern aggression was only or even mostly about slavery is ignorance. Tell me what is more important: What the rules are, or who makes the rules?? Cheap labor was not a nation-breaking issue. The bigger issue was over who makes the rules...the federal govt, or the states. The question of if there would be 50 seats of power or 1. If the south wins, then every state CONTINUES to vote on its own issues....if the north wins, Washington DC makes all the rules. Of course, the winner writes the history books... Many minority groups were fighting for the south on their own free will bc their southern state was going to indentured servitude (work off a plot of land/house) or total freedom.
The right people in office is all it takes to make libertarian changes. Nothing about that is impossible or fairytale. People in power wanting to keep power is all that stops it. The fairytale world is the world where people think the democrat and republican parties are actually different political parties.
Your "point" about saudi arabia/pakistan is just redirecting the subject. They have totally different histories than us and are NOT granted the same rights we are. They didnt have a revolution for these rights like we did. Apples and oranges. "Illegal" weapons are just as, if not more available now than they would be if they were legal. (just as weed was/is) Its not a question of "so should we......?"...that time has passed. we already do have "illegal" weapons, everywhere.
Yeah, if we make/export any technology or product, that is now widely available worldwide, we should have the right to buy it. Its available anyway. Pakistan has them, Saudi Arabia has them, Russia has them....mexico, everyone has all the weapons they want to buy...including us. What you are scared of (widespread availability of weapons) is already here. Criminals can buy weapons that you cant. You cant legislate weapons out of existence. Your crime prevention didnt work. Americans can already buy whatever weapon you can possibly imagine from foreign organized crime, here, now, today. Your gun laws arent stopping anything. Anyone that wants an rpg today can buy one from ivan or pedro if you have the money. same thing with fully auto anything, armor piercing whatever. C4 and all kinds of bombs included. Prohibition does not work. Not even on guns. It should be legal and commonly available but with checks (ID, background) Whats safer, checks or no checks? There will be no checks as long as its illegal. Im not saying rpgs should be issued to every household.
To think the military should be afforded rights above the average citizen is nuts. They serve and protect us. They are from us. We have the power. Not them. Whatever power they have is because we give it to them. They work for us. Public servants for our society. Much like how politics are supposed to be. Not the other way around. There is no such thing as "military" grade, only american grade. With gun control you should just rename it to "criminal" grade.
We will continue to have even bigger problems if we let our rampant govt. disarm or outgun us. (which some argue has already happened and the peoples lack of control of their govt is cause for many of these current problems)
This is a thread about tancredo though, so I apoligize for the semi off topic rants.......it IS like casting pearls before swine...lol
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Wow. Just wow.
I'm not the one who brought up Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, so don't try telling me I'm comparing apples to oranges.
I mean, we sell nuclear tech to the rest of the world so I guess everyone should be entitled to that too. That should be a fun country to live in.
Anyway, yeah, this is getting off topic, since it's about Tancredo the loon. But clearly it's not worth arguing with anyone who is so far off in never never land that he doesn't even have a basic grasp of American history.
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by donniedorko
You ARE extremists, sorry. To think that citizens should be able to buy military grade arms is nuts. We have enough problems as it is now.
I mean, yeah, sure if Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have them we should too! They also have public hangings, no rights for women, and forced religion. Woohoo! Let's do that here too. And any guesses as to what the penalty for weed is in Saudi?
Yes, I was referring to the Americans with Disabilities Act. And no, civil rights were not "going to happen anyway." Maybe in another couple hundred years. But there was absolutely nothing short of the power of the federal government that could have forced the Southern states to give voting rights to their minority citizens. Indeed, the whole idea of protecting the minority from the majority is the downfall of libertarian philosophy. There's just nothing that will make those changes happen in the fairytale world libertarians inhabit, and when asked about it, their response is to spout platitudes about how things would change eventually, when anyone familiar with American history (or indeed world history) knows that isn't true.
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." -Barry Goldwater
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by wkhey4
Make a statement and waste a vote. Sad.
I love it when someone says I'm wasting my vote. That is invariably code for "your vote was cast for someone of whom I do not approve."
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by donniedorko
Wow. Just wow.
I'm not the one who brought up Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, so don't try telling me I'm comparing apples to oranges.
I mean, we sell nuclear tech to the rest of the world so I guess everyone should be entitled to that too. That should be a fun country to live in.
Anyway, yeah, this is getting off topic, since it's about Tancredo the loon. But clearly it's not worth arguing with anyone who is so far off in never never land that he doesn't even have a basic grasp of American history.
Actually if you had even a "...basic grasp of American history" you would know that the Second Amendment was designed to preserve to the citizens of the various states the ability to defend themselves AGAINST the forces of the Federal government, so whatever agents of the Federal government have at their disposal to use against its citizens, we should have at least that.
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by senorx12562
so whatever agents of the Federal government have at their disposal to use against its citizens, we should have at least that.
You're making the rest of us look bad...
I'm as strong a 2A defender as anyone, but not when it comes to explosive munitions, artillery and even some very large-caliber automatic weapons. I believe we can certainly maintain a well-armed militia without private ownership of these things or of other advanced weapon systems like missiles, drones and aircraft-based weapons platforms. The answer is not to arm ourselves with "at least" as much firepower as the federal government, but to systematically disarm our government (literally as well as through legislation circumscribing activities) so that it no longer poses a threat to our people. A good start would be downsizing the military, ending the practice of state executions, enshrining electronic privacy in the Const, prohibiting torture of U.S. citizens (if not everyone), and continued judicial action to strike down onerous state and city gun control initiatives. Your suggestion that Americans arm themselves as we arm our government is foolish.
Tancredo moves within 4 points of Hickenlooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by senorx12562
I love it when someone says I'm wasting my vote. That is invariably code for "your vote was cast for someone of whom I do not approve."
Ask GWB how much he loves Ralph Nader.
Because of those wasted votes we got GWB and the beginning of the end as we knew it in this country. ;)
