Active Topics
-
Porting apps to Leste (29)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 2 days, 22 hrs ago -
Install Fonts in N900 (68)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by teroyk - 4 days, 1 hr ago - more...
JoeF |
2008-11-08
, 17:47
|
|
Posts: 112 |
Thanked: 28 times |
Joined on Mar 2008
@ Victoria, BC
|
#31
|
Originally Posted by sondjata
Uh.. common sense?
 |
|
2008-11-08
, 17:57
|
|
Posts: 3,096 |
Thanked: 1,525 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ Michigan, USA
|
#32
|
Originally Posted by JoeF
Yes this seems to be lacking in about 50% of the American people...
Uh.. common sense?
__________________
To all my Maemo friends. I will no longer be monitoring any of my threads here on a regular basis. I am no longer supporting anything I did under maemo at maemo.org. If you need some help with something you can reach me at tablethacker.com or www.facebook.com/penguinbait. I have disabled my PM's here, and removed myself from Council email and Community mailing list. There has been some fun times, see you around.
To all my Maemo friends. I will no longer be monitoring any of my threads here on a regular basis. I am no longer supporting anything I did under maemo at maemo.org. If you need some help with something you can reach me at tablethacker.com or www.facebook.com/penguinbait. I have disabled my PM's here, and removed myself from Council email and Community mailing list. There has been some fun times, see you around.
 |
|
2008-11-08
, 18:02
|
|
Posts: 5,478 |
Thanked: 5,222 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ St. Petersburg, FL
|
#33
|
Originally Posted by JoeF
Common sense says that taking away people's right to defend themselves is immoral.
Uh.. common sense?
Common sense means different things to different people. You see taking away a basic human right as a Good Thing™, and I don't.
__________________
Ryan Abel
Ryan Abel
 |
|
2008-11-08
, 18:21
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#34
|
Originally Posted by penguinbait
Well, I just listed four; you may say that they are not needed as semi-auto weapons can be used for any of these, but in each case the full-auto weapons work better.
Originally Posted by BensonDo people really need access to automatic weapons?A couple or three points:
- ...
- There are legitimate reasons to own them. National defense and revolution are the principal reasons for the 2nd amendment, but recreation and self- and home-defense are also reasons. (An automatic weapon (especially select-fire) is no worse and in some ways better than a semi-auto for self- and home-defense.)
- ...
I am all for the right to bare arms, but there is also nothing wrong with common sense gun control.
Seems like the right question to me, and I do not believe I was proposing any solution, just a problem to be addressed.
I see no legitimate reason to own these weapons.
And you still provide no reason (beyond the meaningless invocation of common sense) why the right to bear these particular arms should be infringed, and you just said you're all for it.
__________________
World's first inductively-charged N900!
World's first inductively-charged N900!
|
|
2008-11-08
, 18:26
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#35
|
Originally Posted by geneven
I don't say that the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons should be protected, but I do say that it is protected until we amend the Constitution to authorize Congress to limit it. (Nukes are, of course, practically a non-issue, because practically nobody has the funds to research, design, and build one, but they're perfectly fair game for discussion. And I'd be very likely to support a narrowly-drawn amendment authorizing Congress to regulate them, just in case...)
"Unless you're proposing a constitutional amendment authorizing Congress to place restrictions on some classes of arms, it doesn't even matter if people need it. Congress was given no such authority, and moreover was specifically excluded by the 2nd amendment."
Yes, and that's why I insist on my right to bear nuclear weapons in my house here. Are they not arms? And with what a bang I could express myself and oppose unjust authority!
There is another school of thinking which holds that possessing a nuclear weapon, due to its indiscriminate destructive effects guaranteed to harm innocents, is an overt aggressive act justifying use of force in self-defense to neutralize that threat. See this article for an exposition.
__________________
World's first inductively-charged N900!
World's first inductively-charged N900!
|
|
2008-11-08
, 18:31
|
|
Posts: 3,428 |
Thanked: 2,856 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
|
#36
|
Originally Posted by geneven
The supreme court disagree's with you. Washington D.C. just got pwned thanks to that.
the most likely interpretation of that ammendment is that the "people" have the right to keep and bear arms, not individuals at all.
the American Revolution was not just a bunch of colonists behind trees -- it was an officially declared action, not guerilla warfare, and not waged by individuals but by groups that considered themselves legitimate representatives of the people, and had in fact been recognized as such by the British before the revolution.
And in fact a lot of the tactics in the Revolution were guerrilla warfare... and most of the men and women fighting it were not in the organized military at all. And a vast majority of them used their OWN weapons.
Weapons it seems that most of this forum would wish they didn't have.
LA Riots, Katrina, and other mass panics that still go on today go to prove that even in our so-called "civilized" times.. panic replaces reason, chaos replaces order, and the police cannot sometimes even get to you. In the Riots the police had to abandon entire sections to the city.. in Katrina they couldn't physically get to some areas being destroyed... not all of the destruction was done by the "act of god".
The problem with "common sense" laws.. is the age-old addage "If you give a mouse a cookie... he's gonna want some milk". The instant you let the government begin to control something.. they will continue on that path to strip you of everything.
Don't get me wrong.. I'm former military and I love my country; but history has shown time and time again that NO empire, government, kingdom, has withstood the test of time. And a large number of them failed due to government corruption. Would you have us just take the stance that "Well, since it hasn't happened yet, we should make sure we are completely un-prepared for it to ever happen?"
What happens if we finally LOSE a world war? You want to just willingly change from American to "whoever is ruling us now" people?
|
|
2008-11-08
, 19:43
|
|
Posts: 3,096 |
Thanked: 1,525 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ Michigan, USA
|
#37
|
Originally Posted by fatalsaint
I will use my Sheridan bb gun and start blinding people, finishing them off with a potato cannon, gas bombs, nail bombs, whatever is needed to protect myself and family. I have always said, when the Iraqi army crosses the Genesee county line I'll be out there fighting. Until then, I'm just not that concerned about Iraq, or having an uzi or a mac 10. And if it came to that I am more of a sniper anyway, Wolverines!!!!!!
What happens if we finally LOSE a world war? You want to just willingly change from American to "whoever is ruling us now" people?
Wolverines!!!!!!
Mac 10
Uzi
__________________
To all my Maemo friends. I will no longer be monitoring any of my threads here on a regular basis. I am no longer supporting anything I did under maemo at maemo.org. If you need some help with something you can reach me at tablethacker.com or www.facebook.com/penguinbait. I have disabled my PM's here, and removed myself from Council email and Community mailing list. There has been some fun times, see you around.
To all my Maemo friends. I will no longer be monitoring any of my threads here on a regular basis. I am no longer supporting anything I did under maemo at maemo.org. If you need some help with something you can reach me at tablethacker.com or www.facebook.com/penguinbait. I have disabled my PM's here, and removed myself from Council email and Community mailing list. There has been some fun times, see you around.
Last edited by penguinbait; 2008-11-08 at 19:45.
 |
|
2008-11-08
, 20:15
|
|
Posts: 481 |
Thanked: 65 times |
Joined on Aug 2007
@ Westcountry, UK
|
#38
|
While I have no intentions of getting into an argument with americans about gun control (been there, done that), this:
There are armed response units in the UK, there always have been. There are other armed officers in certain problem places, and there are armed police at airports.
However, most police in most cities, towns and villages don't have guns or even access to them, and in general, they don't need them. Shooting are rare in the UK - virtually every shooting makes the news as a big story. I personally have never seen a gun outside of an airport or a military base and I am 43. In the city I lived in all my life up to a few years ago, there was one shooting in 2001, and one in 1993. I don't know if there were others before.
In the town I am now in, there hasn't been a shooting that I am aware of.
Also while handguns are illegal, shotguns have always been legal.
The gun thing is one thing that concerned me while I lived in the states, and I am happy with the way things are here.
I am not trying to say you shouldn't have guns if you want them, thats between you and your constitution.
Just that if you are going trot out facts to support your cause, make sure they are correct
Originally Posted by Snoshrk
Is a complete fantasy.
IIRC the British Police have in the past couple of years or so started carrying guns as they could not effectively enforce the law because the criminals had guns. FYI: Gun ownership has been illegal in the UK for many, many years.
There are armed response units in the UK, there always have been. There are other armed officers in certain problem places, and there are armed police at airports.
However, most police in most cities, towns and villages don't have guns or even access to them, and in general, they don't need them. Shooting are rare in the UK - virtually every shooting makes the news as a big story. I personally have never seen a gun outside of an airport or a military base and I am 43. In the city I lived in all my life up to a few years ago, there was one shooting in 2001, and one in 1993. I don't know if there were others before.
In the town I am now in, there hasn't been a shooting that I am aware of.
Also while handguns are illegal, shotguns have always been legal.
The gun thing is one thing that concerned me while I lived in the states, and I am happy with the way things are here.
I am not trying to say you shouldn't have guns if you want them, thats between you and your constitution.
Just that if you are going trot out facts to support your cause, make sure they are correct
 |
|
2008-11-08
, 20:48
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#39
|
Very thought provoking original post.
Typically the best provisions for safety are as the OP put it: if the bulk of society is employed, healthy, happy, etc, then they are at their most secure. There will be fewer people acting sociopathically and they will be easier to identify and manage.
The Left would have us believe that an extremely caring and doting government is the solution.
The Right would have us believe that an extemely authoritarian and tough government is the solution.
Both equate to Nanny States, just of different flavors. The Right just refuses to acknowledge that their "solution" is such a thing... but it is.
The Right tends to hold sway for the most part. People fear when things trend badly and the quick fix is a combination of rights restrictions, harsher sentencing, adult-level prosecution of juveniles instead of reform, etc.
Many of us gladly gave up freedom for the illusion of safety after the 9/11 attacks, comepletely overlooking that even the toughest restrictions will never, ever enable absolute safety. And those harsh crackdowns serve to antagonize fringe elements who create/exacerbate the same problem that the right-wing nanny-staters are purporting to solve.
The Left just isn't viewed as strong enough to lead usually, especially in an environment of fear. We saw such allegations in the US presidential campaign.
Methinks we need Theodore Roosevelt-types for the most part. "Walk softly and carry a big stick". Sound advice to me. Oh, and get cracking on the root cause of the problems listed above. We'll get as close to a Great Society as we can then.
Typically the best provisions for safety are as the OP put it: if the bulk of society is employed, healthy, happy, etc, then they are at their most secure. There will be fewer people acting sociopathically and they will be easier to identify and manage.
The Left would have us believe that an extremely caring and doting government is the solution.
The Right would have us believe that an extemely authoritarian and tough government is the solution.
Both equate to Nanny States, just of different flavors. The Right just refuses to acknowledge that their "solution" is such a thing... but it is.
The Right tends to hold sway for the most part. People fear when things trend badly and the quick fix is a combination of rights restrictions, harsher sentencing, adult-level prosecution of juveniles instead of reform, etc.
Many of us gladly gave up freedom for the illusion of safety after the 9/11 attacks, comepletely overlooking that even the toughest restrictions will never, ever enable absolute safety. And those harsh crackdowns serve to antagonize fringe elements who create/exacerbate the same problem that the right-wing nanny-staters are purporting to solve.
The Left just isn't viewed as strong enough to lead usually, especially in an environment of fear. We saw such allegations in the US presidential campaign.
Methinks we need Theodore Roosevelt-types for the most part. "Walk softly and carry a big stick". Sound advice to me. Oh, and get cracking on the root cause of the problems listed above. We'll get as close to a Great Society as we can then.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 |
|
2008-11-08
, 20:48
|
|
Posts: 4,783 |
Thanked: 1,253 times |
Joined on Aug 2007
@ norway
|
#40
|
Originally Posted by tabletrat
and funny enough, with the number of loads one can stuff into a shotgun, that beast can do a whole lot of things
Also while handguns are illegal, shotguns have always been legal.