Auditors

[jimmyriddle 87]

A little bit David Ike-ish, but still worth a look. And it still amazes me that stuff like the NDAA was passed and nobody gave a hoot? To be able to hold any US citizen without trial based on an arbitrary presumption of being a "terrorist", indefinitely as long as the hostilities continue... which is why we're at constant war.

[Eddzz!! + 149]

This guy is a lunatic as are all those that cherish their gun ownership. The only reason you need guns in the USA is because everybody else has one... If your forefathers had any foresight at all, they'd have never written the right to bear arms into the constitution. It's an absolute fallacy and the idea that a country's people can ever be safe with such widespread gun ownership is a cancerous lie.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Eddzz!!

[jimmyriddle 87]

On ‎7‎/‎14‎/‎2016 at 15:28, Eddzz!! said:

This guy is a lunatic as are all those that cherish their gun ownership. The only reason you need guns in the USA is because everybody else has one... If your forefathers had any foresight at all, they'd have never written the right to bear arms into the constitution. It's an absolute fallacy and the idea that a country's people can ever be safe with such widespread gun ownership is a cancerous lie.

I would disagree. I think he does take a bit of a militant PoV there, but in essence he's right. Why are these Third Reich type laws being created? Have you read the Patriot Act? Warrantless searches, blanket wiretapping, asset seizures with no court hearing or right of appeal, gag orders (like super injunctions) in relation to investigations,

So, which amendments are they basically destroying? 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 14th for starters. The public having guns here makes the government very weary, ever thought that this fear actually stops them messing around with civil liberties somewhat? Look at the response after hurricane Katrina. Police going door to door or stopping cars, asking if they had any weapons and unlawfully seizing them just incase, as they were more worried about looting than actually helping people. And we wonder why a central registry is a bad thing?

And newsflash, the US 2nd amendment comes from the UK Bill of Rights. Difference is they've totally destroyed it in the UK.

[MajorDisaster + 579]

I genuinely don't get the Second Amendment.  The wording says that (to paraphrase) citizens need to be armed so we can call on them to form a Militia to protect the country [presumably against the British].  The US now has a large standing army and more besides.  The militia role is taken up by the National Guard so where is the need for citizens to be armed?

[Ether + 1,424]

On 24/07/2016 at 20:30, MajorDisaster said:

I genuinely don't get the Second Amendment.  The wording says that (to paraphrase) citizens need to be armed so we can call on them to form a Militia to protect the country [presumably against the British].  The US now has a large standing army and more besides.  The militia role is taken up by the National Guard so where is the need for citizens to be armed?

The second amendment says:

 "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". 

So in reality its pretty simple from a historic position, there is a need for a well regulated militia and the peoples rights to arms cannot be infringed.  BUT that was a long time ago in a world that was very different.  The question is not what the 2nd amendment says, bt if it is relevant in a modern day society. 

US Military personnel serving overseas were asked to comment if they felt safe when deployed to peaceful nations such as the UK, Germany etc etc where nobody had firearms access.  Overwhelmingly the vast majority declared they felt safer in other countries than the US. 

Edited March 13, 2018 by Funkywingnut