Latest Topics

[ForwardRebels]

Now @HobnailedBoots, we both know why our apparent, self-appointed, monarch wants to ban assault rifles. It's not bc he cares about kids as he does not ( just ask the parents of thousands of dead Iraqi and Afghani children), but rather he wants to give them to the Mexico to be distributed to the drug cartels.

You know, his grandiose strategy of " leading from behind" and all that.

Edited by ForwardRebels, 16 January 2013 - 07:43 PM.

[zartan]

HobnailedBoots, on 16 January 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

A rifle = a bazooka? Six months from now you'll be calling revolvers bazookas at this rate.

BTW - you DO realize that a "bazooka" is not a gun, right?

Obviously I'm exaggerating, but what is the justification for needing anything other than a handgun for personal defense?

[HobnailedBoots]

zartan, on 16 January 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

Obviously I'm exaggerating, but what is the justification for needing anything other than a handgun for personal defense?

Following that line of reasoning, you could eventually ask what the justification is for needing anything other than a butter knife for personal defense.

Let me ask you a question - what is the justification for free speech? Because if we're going to start having to justify our rights, then that opens up the floor to call into question ALL of them.

Edited by HobnailedBoots, 16 January 2013 - 08:05 PM.

[zartan]

HobnailedBoots, on 16 January 2013 - 08:00 PM, said:

Following that line of reasoning, you could eventually ask what the justification is for needing anything other than a butter knife for personal defense.

Let me ask you a question - what is the justification for free speech?

I can just as easily turn that around on you--why stop at rifles? Why shouldn't private citizens drive tanks down the street? Maybe it's because as a society we could come to some sort of decision about what is reasonable for personal protection

[HobnailedBoots]

Our 2nd amendment was not written so that we the people could enjoy Saturdays in the woods shooting deer. It was written so that we could defend ourselves against at tyrannical government.

Liberals (and Obama) seem to share this fantasy that the 2nd amendment exists only to protect "sport shooting," when in reality, it exists to protect ourselves against THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

[HobnailedBoots]

zartan, on 16 January 2013 - 08:09 PM, said:

I can just as easily turn that around on you--why stop at rifles? Why shouldn't private citizens drive tanks down the street? Maybe it's because as a society we could come to some sort of decision about what is reasonable for personal protection

Because Tanks are not DOT approved vehicles for use on highways. Their tracks destroy the pavement.

If a private citizen wants to own a tank though, who are you to say he can't? What's your point? That we are at risk of private citizens using tanks to kill school children? I'd say we're at more of a risk of the federal government using tanks to prevent you from assembling peacefully. Because, you know... that has actually happened before.

Edited by HobnailedBoots, 16 January 2013 - 08:13 PM.

[HobnailedBoots]

zartan, on 16 January 2013 - 08:09 PM, said:

I can just as easily turn that around on you--why stop at rifles? Why shouldn't private citizens drive tanks down the street? Maybe it's because as a society we could come to some sort of decision about what is reasonable for personal protection

You didn't answer my question. How do you justify free speech? Why do you need to be able to say whatever you want, wherever you want?

[zartan]

HobnailedBoots, on 16 January 2013 - 08:12 PM, said:

Because Tanks are not DOT approved vehicles for use on highways. Their tracks destroy the pavement.

If a private citizen wants to own a tank though, who are you to say he can't? What's your point? That we are at risk of private citizens using tanks to kill school children? I'd say we're at more of a risk of the federal government using tanks to prevent you from assembling peacefully. Because, you know... that has actually happened before.

People have slaughtered movie theaters and elementary schools with rifles numerous times in my lifetime. I don't recall too many Tiananmen Square moments on US soil

Sorry, still don't see why people 'need' rifles

[HobnailedBoots]

zartan, on 16 January 2013 - 08:22 PM, said:

People have slaughtered movie theaters and elementary schools with rifles numerous times in my lifetime. I don't recall too many Tiananmen Square moments on US soil

Sorry, still don't see why people 'need' rifles

For the third time I'll ask you - why do you need free speech?

[zartan]

HobnailedBoots, on 16 January 2013 - 08:14 PM, said:

You didn't answer my question. How do you justify free speech? Why do you need to be able to say whatever you want, wherever you want?

It is THE fundamental principle of democracy. I have seen it in practice a hell of a lot more times than the imagined need to have armaments to protect you from a hostile local government in my lifetime

[zartan]

HobnailedBoots, on 16 January 2013 - 08:23 PM, said:

For the third time I'll ask you - why do you need free speech?

If we're keeping score, you have not answered any of my questions either, you are deflecting with questions of your own

[HobnailedBoots]

zartan, on 16 January 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

It is THE fundamental principle of democracy. I have seen it in practice a hell of a lot more times than the imagined need to have armaments to protect you from a hostile local government in my lifetime

The fundamental principle of democracy is that leaders are elected by popular vote. That has nothing to do with your right to free speech. So why do you need free speech? Can't you just keep your opinion to yourself, vote when it's time and that's it? I fail to see how you need free speech to cast a ballot.

So please explain what I'm missing. Why do you need free speech?

[HobnailedBoots]

zartan, on 16 January 2013 - 08:26 PM, said:

If we're keeping score, you have not answered any of my questions either, you are deflecting with questions of your own

I answered all of your questions.

[zartan]

HobnailedBoots, on 16 January 2013 - 08:28 PM, said:

The fundamental principle of democracy is that leaders are elected by popular vote. That has nothing to do with your right to free speech. So why do you need free speech? Can't you just keep your opinion to yourself, vote when it's time and that's it? I fail to see how you need free speech to cast a ballot.

So please explain what I'm missing. Why do you need free speech?

If there's no free speech, how could anybody challenge the incumbent? Politics would be meaningless if we do not have the ability to hold leaders and their ideas to scrutiny

[zartan]

HobnailedBoots, on 16 January 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

I answered all of your questions.

No you didn't. I asked you why anyone needs more than a handgun for personal defense--no answer