So what are you attacking first?

1/15/2013 10:32:05 AM

brb FBI at door

1/15/2013 10:36:21 AM

You said you would take up arms for drone spying. Drones are spying, why aren't you taking up arms?

1/15/2013 10:38:18 AM

what about you? would you ever join an armed rebellion? under what circumstances?

1/15/2013 10:44:02 AM

You don't bring a knife to a gun fight. This is why an armed revolution in America would never work in this day and age.

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 10:47 AM. Reason : .]

1/15/2013 10:47:41 AM

define "work". is a rebellion only successful if it completely overthrows the government? what about other possible outcomes?

we could also discuss the fact that the founding fathers warned us about the dangers of standing armies.

1/15/2013 10:51:56 AM

What happened overnight in New York? On O&A, Ant was screaming bloody murder about a AWB (silly if true) but I haven't heard it on the news when I have had a chance to listen.

Also, am I the only one who literally never thinks about the federal government and has never perceived any of my rights being trampled on? Maybe I'm just naive and/or too busy to notice.

1/15/2013 10:55:32 AM

The second you decided to rise up, you'd probably be blown to bits before you could even tweet about it.

1/15/2013 10:56:00 AM

Stop dodging the question.

If we need guns to stand up to the potential tyranny of the government, let's define what that means. At what point do we know that our checks and balances have failed and need to take up arms, what is that point.

To NeuseRvrRate we have already reached that point (drone spying, but he is just too much of a pussy apparently to do what he said he would)

1/15/2013 10:57:40 AM

^^^when the Federal AWB of '94 was going to sunset, several states, including NY, enacted their own AWB.

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 11:01 AM. Reason : continue with the personal attacks]

1/15/2013 10:58:08 AM

edited to remove attack:

Stop dodging the question.

If we need guns to stand up to the potential tyranny of the government, let's define what that means. At what point do we know that our checks and balances have failed and need to take up arms, what is that point.

To NeuseRvrRate we have already reached that point (drone spying, but he will apparently not do what he said he would because he is afraid of the FBI)

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 11:03 AM. Reason : hk]

1/15/2013 11:03:45 AM

The problem with revolution in Western democracies is that our terrible government emerged due to the people, not in spite of them. It's the population itself, not the politicians, that can't agree on anything. For that, the only possible revolution is fragmenting into multiple nations along political lines, which isn't even geographically possible at the moment.

1/15/2013 11:23:12 AM

i'd say the growth of the federal govt and the move away from being a group of united states is to blame

1/15/2013 12:20:02 PM

Quote :

"If we need guns to stand up to the potential tyranny of the government, let's define what that means. At what point do we know that our checks and balances have failed and need to take up arms, what is that point."

When "the revolution" happens or what triggers it isn't important. It's just like the police don't have to come to your house for you to obey the law. You obey the law because there is a threat of violence.

In the same vein, an armed revolt is not necessary. If the government knows that citizens have some way to defend themselves, that's one check on abuse of power. Not a very good check, obviously. The U.S. government is the most powerful of all time and could eradicate all human life many times over. Luckily, we've got some really swell, altruistic guys running it and there's absolutely no reason to believe that their desire to expand state power will continue.

1/15/2013 12:27:40 PM

Militia, Standing Armies, and the Second Amendment: Some Perspectives from the American Revolution

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1495

interesting article

1/15/2013 12:31:54 PM

The funny thing is the NRA says the solution is armed guards. Armed guards would be a step in the direction of a police state. I thought many who want to keep and bear arms seek to prevent a police state from taking hold.

1/15/2013 12:32:01 PM

The whole concept of taking up arms against the government is ridiculous. Who will you be fighting?

1/15/2013 12:32:33 PM

the boogeyman, of course

1/15/2013 12:33:43 PM

So you all will take up arms when we have an armed guard? Isn't that what the police are? When are you attacking?

1/15/2013 12:39:57 PM

Gun control leads to tyranny, let's avoid it by instead heavily arming all government employees in our schools, hospitals, DMV's, airports, libraries, highway rest stops, etc.

1/15/2013 12:50:45 PM

http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S2230-2013

The law is retroactive, meaning that the state will be able to literally "come for your guns". This is why people are against weapon registration.

1/15/2013 12:51:46 PM

^ are you sure it's retroactive?

I read an article this morning saying existing assault weapons are grandfathered in.

I think including pistol grips as a banned feature is completely idiotic though.

1/15/2013 12:58:41 PM

Quote :

"It's a good thing our forefathers didn't build a series of checks and balances into the construction of the government. The right to bear arms is our only assurance to not be overrun by a tyrannical government."

Yes, we have checks and balances, and that's one of the reasons why armed rebellion is such a distant concept in this country. Part of those checks and balances are strict limits on what powers the federal government has. And it is our responsibility as citizens to ensure that our government adheres to those restrictions and in the event that we decide it is necessary to loosen those restrictions, to do so in a manner which is beneficial to all the people and provides the least amount of room for abuse by those who would wield power for their own ends.

1/15/2013 12:58:45 PM

^^

Quote :

"Within one year of the effective date, all weapons defined as assault weapons under the new "one-feature" test, as well as weapons grandfathered in under the original assault weapons ban, must be registered. Current owners of these banned weapons may transfer the weapons only to a firearms dealer or transfer to an out of state buyer. All registered owners will be subject to a review of disqualifiers by the State Police."

1/15/2013 1:00:11 PM

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/01/executive-order-nra-should-fear-most/61004/

heaven forbid with actually find out the correlation between more guns and more gun violence

Quote :

"In 1996, some members of Congress tried to completely defund the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, which was doing gun research, Live Science explains. Instead, lawmakers stripped $2.6 million from the CDC's budget -- the exact amount it had spent on gun injury research the year before. Congress forbade research that might "advocate or promote gun control." In 2003, Kansas Rep. Todd Tiahrt forbid the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from giving researchers data about guns used in crime. Last year, the National Institutes of Health was blocked from funding gun research. The efforts have had impressive results. According to a letter to Biden signed by 100 researchers, The NIH has funded just three studies on gun injuries in the last 40 years. Hey, that's three whole studies, right? Hardly censorship! Well, the researchers point out that guns have killed 4 million people since 1973, while four infections diseases have killed just 2,000 -- and the NIH has funded almost 500 studies on them. The letter protests that "legislative language has the effect of discouraging the funding of well-crafted scientific studies." This was a direct result of National Rifle Association lobbying, NPR's Carrie Johnson explains. Former Emory University researcher Art Kellermann told NPR that while at Emory, he found that a gun kept at home was 43 times more likely to be used in the death of a member of the household than it was to be used to defend the household from a bad guy. The National Rifle Association pressured Emory to stop Kellermann's research, but it didn't. Kellermann told NPR, "[T]hey turned to a softer target, which was the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], the organization that was funding much of this work. And although gun injury prevention research was never more than a tiny percentage of the CDC's research budget, it was enough to bring them under the fire of the NRA." So far, the gun lobby has been quite successful in selling this. For evidence, look at the advice Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Obama's former chief of staff and a veteran of the triangulating Clinton administration, gave Democrats during a panel at the Center for American Progress. "Focus the argument on the criminals' access [to guns] and you're going to get a bipartisan majority," Emanuel said, according to Roll Call. "It's not about 'gun control.' It's about 'criminal access to guns.' That changes the debate." Gun control advocates want to change the debate in a different way. Existing laws wouldn't have stopped the Newtown shooting, because Adam Lanza's weapons wer purchased legally by his mom. She was theoretically a good guy -- a regular, law-abiding citizen -- with a gun. According to several national polls, the shooting has increased the public's desire for gun control, including an assault weapon ban. But most people who are killed by guns aren't killed in a mass shooting or with a military-style rifle. The NRA has an incentive to limit how much the public knows about how guns affect average anonymous people. Science and knowledge can be very powerful. Just ask the tobacco companies."

how can some people read that and not realize that they are being duped by a big, for profit lobby that doesn't give a shit about "freedom"?

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 1:08 PM. Reason : quotes]

1/15/2013 1:06:35 PM

the idea was not for citizens to grab their rifles and run out the door and start attacking federal buildings whenever they didn't like something the govt did. read the article at that link i posted. then do some reading on 200 years worth of legislation that turned the militia into army reserves aka National Guard, then eventually turned power over the National Guard over to POTUS in 2007. thankfully, the scariest part of the 2007 legislation was repealed in 2008, but it's unbelievable that it was ever passed in the first place.

1/15/2013 1:07:34 PM

Quote :

"Yes, we have checks and balances, and that's one of the reasons why armed rebellion is such a distant concept in this country. Part of those checks and balances are strict limits on what powers the federal government has. And it is our responsibility as citizens to ensure that our government adheres to those restrictions and in the event that we decide it is necessary to loosen those restrictions, to do so in a manner which is beneficial to all the people and provides the least amount of room for abuse by those who would wield power for their own ends."

You're not raising up against the government whether you have an AK 47 or a pistol, so lets not act like this is so massive government mission to abuse you.

1/15/2013 1:08:25 PM

At what point would we need to rise up against the government, this is not a trivial point.

If your argument is that guns are a final check and balance, propose scenarios when they would be needed and would be used. Whether it is a state militia or a militia you create, at what point will our government have failed so badly that we must overthrow it?


[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 1:21 PM. Reason : So far we have armed guards and drones, both of which we already have]

1/15/2013 1:18:37 PM

Gotta give the US government credit where credit is due.

Forefathers gave citizens the right to bear arms so as to prevent tyranny (supposedly anyway, it was probably more of an attempt to quickly form a standing army in a young country vulnerable to outside rule, but whatevs).

So, instead of trampling on the second amendment, an abusive US government instead systematically strips away every other right in the bill of rights while leaving the second amendment in tact, giving dumb-ass yahoos the appearance of living in a free and open society.



"Dey ain't took my guns yet, cuz I'm free and willing to die fur muh liberties!", says the patriot waiting in line at the airport with his belt and shoes in his hands, waiting to go through the full body scanner.

1/15/2013 1:30:20 PM

while i kinda, kinda see your point, i don't think there are rednecks who talk and think like that that are frequent flyers.

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 1:32 PM. Reason : ]

1/15/2013 1:32:28 PM

Quote :

"(supposedly anyway, it was probably more of an attempt to quickly form a standing army in a young country vulnerable to outside rule, but whatevs)."

no, it was tyranny. look at the framers who wanted it

1/15/2013 1:33:27 PM

Quote :

"You're not raising up against the government whether you have an AK 47 or a pistol, so lets not act like this is so massive government mission to abuse you."

It's not a massive government mission to abuse me, or any other individual, nor do I harbor any illusions to that effect. But neither has any tyrannical government in history been about abusing any one particular individual. They have however, throughout history and regardless of the checks and balances against them, have sought to increase their power. And all governments throughout history, as they have increased their power have drawn to that power the sorts of people who should not be allowed to wield such power. As such, it is only reasonable and prudent to seek to limit the inevitable growth of government for as long as possible to ensure the continued freedom of its current and future citizens for as long as possible.

Quote :

""Dey ain't took my guns yet, cuz I'm free and willing to die fur muh liberties!", says the patriot waiting in line at the airport with his belt and shoes in his hands, waiting to go through the full body scanner."

I think you will find that many of the people who are gun rights proponents are equally outraged at the continual encroachment of the TSA and the ineffective security theater that it promotes. Unfortunately, just as you have been convinced of the boogeyman of mass murderers, so too have many americans been convinced of the boogeyman of airline terrorists. And so even though not a single terrorist has ever been stopped by the TSA, even though the TSA continues to miss loaded guns, foot long razor blades and various other harmful devices, even though the TSA is an onerous restriction on the freedoms of american citizens, the government continues to pass laws expanding the power of the TSA, and focusing on inane things which do nothing to improve airline security. So if you find the TSA to be offensive, if you find it to be a violation of your rights, and you have distrust for the TSA and new legislation to give them expanded power, then perhaps you can understand why gun rights advocates have the same distrust and reaction to the proposed gun laws.

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 1:42 PM. Reason : sdfh]

1/15/2013 1:34:31 PM

PROPOSE AN EXAMPLE OF WHEN WE WOULD TAKE UP ARMS, AT WHAT POINT WILL THEIR POWER HAVE GROWN SO MUCH YOU NEED GUNS TO STOP IT?

1/15/2013 1:35:51 PM

when they try to take their guns, of course.

1/15/2013 1:36:38 PM

^^ When all the other methods of enacting change have failed, or when you are no longer given the option to use those methods, exactly as the framers intended. For a relatively recent example of this, you might consider the Battle of Athens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29)

1/15/2013 1:48:49 PM

I just thought I'd bring this up considering the "Stalin, Hitler, Mao instituted gun control" thing is always brought up. Libya, Egypt, and Syria all had far more restrictive gun control than us, yet somehow their huddling powerless masses have been able to manage very successful revolutions without the right to bear arms.

1/15/2013 1:49:11 PM

Quote :

"So if you find the TSA to be offensive, if you find it to be a violation of your rights, and you have distrust for the TSA and new legislation to give them expanded power, then perhaps you can understand why gun rights advocates have the same distrust and reaction to the proposed gun laws."

Ay homie. All I'm saying is that you can't out-arm the state. Your little guns ain't doin' shit to stop the gross overreach of the government. So stop deluding yourself into thinking that your right to bear arms is the final barrier between a civilized democracy and totalitarian rule.

You have guns, they have drones. Period. Either use 'em for something we can all get behind or shut the fuck up about them.

1/15/2013 2:09:51 PM

Here's a question: Given the TSA, wiretapping, indefinite detention, targeted assassinations, racial profiling, the drug war, and more and more and more...

If you gun nuts are going to protect my freedom, what the fuck are you waiting for? Are you going to be gripping those guns all the way to the gas chamber?

1/15/2013 2:12:43 PM

Quote :

"All I'm saying is that you can't out-arm the state."

you're right. that's exactly the condition that this country's founders warned us against.

1/15/2013 2:17:20 PM

shit or get off the pot

1/15/2013 2:19:02 PM

"Don't ever mechanize warfare because it will make our 2nd amendment pointless" - James Madison

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 2:20 PM. Reason : .]

1/15/2013 2:20:04 PM

Quote :

"shit or get off the pot"

so since 2A and the people's militia have been rendered powerless by federal overreaches, i'm a pussy if i don't charge to certain death with my AR-15

1/15/2013 2:31:42 PM

No. You're a pussy because you sat idly by when all those other rights were taken away from you without doing anything about it.

1/15/2013 2:33:14 PM

sorry i wasn't around to complain about the Militia Act of 1903

1/15/2013 2:34:58 PM

Quote :

"if i don't charge to certain death with my AR-15"

b-b-b-b-b-b-but, I thought you'd be safe with your 30 round weapons? Right, right? You need 30 rounds to better incapacitate the enemy?

You know, the enemy that is the government?

You've got 30 rounds. Surely you won't be charging to certain death.

1/15/2013 2:39:04 PM

Oh, I guess that's not it, then.

You just need 30 rounds to brutally murder a petty vandal who wants to steal your TV and coffee table.

When it comes to the actual cause of resisting government oppression, you cower and grip onto your gun like child holding on to his security blanket.

1/15/2013 2:46:39 PM

What the fuck are you people even arguing about at this point? Yes, no one poses any threat to the U.S. government, not even the voters. We all have a boot on our throat and the legitimate tools we have to remove it are completely insignificant. Democratic reform and electoral politics are absolute bullshit.

So, with all that said, you really shouldn't be calling for the expansion of state power. Yeah, the ship has sailed in that regard, but at least let people have the right to defend themselves against the criminals that the system churns out by the thousands.

Stop with this "you're a pussy because you won't suicide in a police station" emotional garbage. Everyone can see what you're doing.

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 2:53 PM. Reason : ]

1/15/2013 2:52:08 PM

imagine if everyone who thought that some aspect of the bill of rights had been violated bound together. imagine how powerful that political force would be. the govt would no longer be able to stomp on us. instead, we have been turned against one another with this democrat vs. republican bullshit. dumbass rednecks only worry about their guns and have no reason to protect free speech because they have nothing important to say and are too stupid to comprehend important things others have to say. erosion of 1A means nothing to them. anti-gunners will never use firearms, so they only see the bad effects. erosion of 2A means nothing to them. dumbass hilljacks think that the PATRIOT act won't affect them if they're not doing anything illegal, but don't realize that when it comes time for the revolution they desire, you'll have to do illegal things.

Quote :

"When it comes to the actual cause of resisting government oppression, you cower and grip onto your gun like child holding on to his security blanket."

i would like to apologize if i ever insinuated that an armed revolt is possible under current law. do not confuse me with those nutjobs. i was being facetious with the drone comment and i apologize for that.

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 2:56 PM. Reason : ^this]


this is exactly what i'm talking about. all you see is a pro-2A individual and you're pre-programmed to assume they're a wacko who thinks their AR is going to help them overthrow the govt and you attack. we have been conditioned to react this way.

[Edited on January 15, 2013 at 3:01 PM. Reason : asdf]

1/15/2013 2:52:14 PM

Quote :

"Stop with this "you're a pussy because you won't suicide in a police station" emotional garbage. Everyone can see what you're doing."

I would hope so. I was laying it on pretty thick.

But the sentiment still stands. If one truly believes that he or she is the last hurdle to brutal oppression, then they should fucking do something about it.

Otherwise they should just come clean and drop the whole "Second Amendment is necessary to stop tyranny!!!" gambit and just admit that they want guns because it gives them wood to fantasize about self defense.

1/15/2013 3:02:42 PM

Quote :

"this is exactly what i'm talking about. all you see is a pro-2A individual and you're pre-programmed to assume they're a wacko who thinks their AR is going to help them overthrow the govt and you attack. we have been conditioned to react this way"

You're missing my biggest criticism of you. I'm not attacking you for what you think I am attacking you for. You think I have you lumped in to the "overthrow da gubmint" category. I don't. I have you lumped in to the rational person who just won't admit that he likes guns simply for the sake of liking guns.

I KNOW you don't fantasize about an armed revolt. So just admit that you've got a hero complex and are itching for the day to pull out your gun over a petty criminal and give him a good 'ole fashion what for.

1/15/2013 3:06:11 PM