freemindfade

Joined

• started 193 topics
• posted 5,163 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by freemindfade

• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Because they have very strict gun control. Something like 14 inspections or renewals per year.
  It's about balance and responsibility.

  eeeeeggggggsactly!
  no 2nd amendments

  no bans

  just control
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Isn't that how it works in a perfect world?

  Very good. You have shown how complicated an issue this is clearer than I have seen on this forum to date. Thank you for not oversimplify the solution.
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Is a set population safer or more perilously dangerous where there is the proliferation of personal gun ownership and distribution of guns and add in the sales of semiautomatic guns as well ?

  My short answer is it depends on the population.

  Switzerland is what? #4 on the per capita ownership?

  But where are they on gun deaths per capita? Pretty low?? (also deaths are generally suicide and "crimes of passion")

  In this one case it would seem responsible gun ownership has a bigger impact than just gun ownership

  just saying... I don't think two world cultures will be exactly the same.

  responsible gun ownership should be a priority and probably more attainable goal/initiative than an outright ban at this point
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  However states like California with very strict gun laws have very high murder/homicides by guns. The theory at first blush seems plausible however it is just that a theory. The numbers say otherwise.

  Chicago and New York are also good examples. You just as easily acquire this RPG everyone has been talking about as get a gun in the city limits of New York legally.

  Outside of highly sensationalized and emotional mass shootings most of the death by gun is going on in the inner cities where gun restrictions are highest.
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  All this reminds me of the demonizing of pot and the fear mongering propaganda of days past. People still swear "its a gateway drug!!!!" You'll get refer madness!!! It's a bandwagon that is blown out of proportion. You smoke pot you'll lose your mind! Pick up a gun somewhere a mass shooting takes place. And "ban" is just the simplest solution to more complex problems people can come up with.

  Back when columbine happened I remember people on the news debating the impact of the entertainment industry... they watched The Matrix!! They played Doom!!! They listened to Marilyn Manson!!!.. all these "things" were taking heat for what these kids did. Whatever the big agenda is lets scream about that now!
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  I have no position to hold

  I have a gun... its not going anywhere, I am just letting you guys talk and having a laugh.

  I'm pro gun for me and no one else. It ends there, all this political crap? whatever. Everyone else can figure that out on their own. I think loop holes should be closed, and more regulation is good. All these opinions do nothing to change anything. Only actions change the world.

  I have no position so I am not debating anything and i know that is driving you guys nuts. But if someone says something crazy I have to point it out. That's all. Don't get mad

  State your facts, don't mind me if I question them.
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Please stop it! You guys honestly watch too many movies!!! :) Your comments are more deadly than guns because they are killing me! This is getting silly. I bet you also think:

  • Silencers actually make guns silent
  • No one runs out of bullets if they have a machine gun on full auto
  • and so on...

  hand guns or shot guns are pretty useless against full automatics or semi-automatics guns designed mostly for military use.

  If you had any military training or knowledge you would know that full auto is not used for shooting people but for creating suppressing fire. Probably the deadliest thing you could have is sniper rifle and be sitting far away from everything. Talk to someone who has been in real wartime fire fights, they are not using full auto to shoot someone accurately.

  But this is silly. The reality is most deaths from gun violence come from the old handgun. I think you can still get those in Canada no??
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  • Laws don't work, so we shouldn't bother with them

  • People die from other things, so we shouldn't bother

  • Guns make us safer, ignore the numbers

  Now we're talkin!

  I honestly don't get why that's such a bad thing to some.

  Because they have traded being JW for SJW (social justice warrior) and obama and the news has told them that its bad and the cause of all our ills. They must pledge allegiance to the SJW mob!
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  Most deadly cause of unnecessary death in the universe! And its in this gun!

  

  According to this chart I randomly pulled up on the internet being a fat @$$ is far deadlier than owning a gun!

  
  
• 
  166

  2nd amendment right ... where should it end?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  one thing i like to do to test a theory is to take things to extremes or to their logical conclusion to see if the premises still hold.

  very often, a claim that seems to make sense at a superficial level falls apart when you start to stretch it a little.. so let's play a game.. suppose the 2nd amendment is valid, that some "well regulated militia" really is necessary to hold the government to account.. obviously when this was drafted the government had access to the weapons of it's day which would be muskets!

  so muskets all round.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  freemindfade

  they need guns themselves as a viable means to protect themselves personally from other Americas who have guns.

  If someone is in my house the doesn't belong there I don't care if they have a piece of bread in their hands, I'm going to protect my family from them, It doesn't matter what they arm themselves with. I don't have a gun because other people have guns. I have one because I have the option of protecting my family and my work family from anyone or anything dangerous.

  Sorry america is so scary for you guys :)

  You must think day to day life here is like an action film lol

  My advice keep giving opinions and by all means stay away from such a dangerous scary place.