| Author |
Topic:
Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
Jabbadabbado
Title: Senate Floor Moderator
Registered:
Mar '99
|
Date Posted:
6/27 9:24am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
I have a high level of sympathy for gun ownership in general, but not hand gun ownership in particular. The wide dissemination of hand guns in the U.S. is a public health and social dysfunction disaster.
Scalia's enshrinement of personal preference in gun styles as an individual right is ludicrous, but now the law of the land. Is it a disaster? No. The body of case law that will have to follow on the heels of this decision will fill in the gaps. The gun lobby will now enter a golden age of filing lawsuits to seek further clarification and narrowing of permissible gun legislation.
-----signature-----
Malthusian Doomsday Quack
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 9:28am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
KnightWriter posted:
Try not to overthink things so much, Richard. I think we'd all be better off.
Then please try to think a little, yourself.
You posted a rather absurd and unrealistic bit about how citizens couldn't stop the government from taking over in a forceful way. History clearly shows that it isn't the case.
In fact, personal ownership of firearms has been used several times in the history of the US to either protect rights from the government, or to protect them from vigilante groups when the government wouldn't. Look at the Battle of Athens or the Deacons for Defense.
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
KnightWriter
Title:
Administrator Emeritus
Registered:
Nov '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 9:33am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
|
Amazing. You still don't see how you completely missed the point. The government doesn't have to completely subdue a population to rule it to some extent, or force the majority of citizens to obey it. If the United States government or army felt like turning this country into a military dictatorship, there's nothing anyone could do to stop it. Period. Resist it? Sure. Outright stop it? Not a chance.
-----signature-----
"May you live all the days of your life"
"There's a special place in Hell for women who don't support other women."--Sarah Palin
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 9:50am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
KnightWriter posted:
Amazing. You still don't see how you completely missed the point. The government doesn't have to completely subdue a population to rule it to some extent, or force the majority of citizens to obey it. If the United States government or army felt like turning this country into a military dictatorship, there's nothing anyone could do to stop it. Period. Resist it? Sure. Outright stop it? Not a chance.
Again, look at the Battle of Athens link I gave you. It happened in 1946 in Athens, Tennessee, and it is a clear example of private citizens using their personal arms to protect their rights against a corrupt government. It is a textbook example of the sort of thing that we are talking about.
And, quite frankly, your suggestion is almost completely unrealistic. It's about as realistic as saying that Bush is planning to cancel the election this November and start a third term himself. It's a bit set of "what ifs", that have no real foundation. It assumes that the US military would (virtually unanimously) follow orders to institute a military dictatorship. Having lived virtually my entire life around the military, I know for a fact that a good number (almost definitely a majority, likely a supermajority) of military personnel would refuse such orders, and would actively fight against their implementation.
Could a military coup of some kind gain some level of influence over part or all of the US? Sure, but it wouldn't last if the population is both armed (even with just small arms) and opposed to it. That is one of the clearest messages of the past century of warfare. Look to France in WWII, Vietnam, modern Iraq, and many other conflicts throughout the world. It's not uncommon for a rag-tag group of poorly armed rebels to be extremely effective against an organized and technologically superior force, even if the superior force also has greater numbers.
And your mention of nuclear weapons was completely irrelevant, because you can't use them to pacify a insurrection within the population. They would only be effective in a two state conflict, or when used by a terrorist/insurrection force itself. All it could do is inflame people's passions and make them stop thinking rationally about the subject.
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Fluke_Groundrunner
Registered:
Jun '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 9:54am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
I'm sure Scalia was humping his desk after this ruling.
I need to ask though, how does a gun with a trigger lock prevent self-defense? Laws that may require a gun to be locked up are ok, but not a law requiring a gun to have a trigger lock? It seems like unlocking a cabinet to get a gun would make self-defense more complicated then disengaging a trigger lock? Am I missing something here?
-----signature-----
Star Wars Association of Pittsburgh http://www.pittsburghfanforce.com
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
KnightWriter
Title:
Administrator Emeritus
Registered:
Nov '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 9:56am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
It's a bit set of "what ifs", that have no real foundation
Sort of like how people say that one of the reasons they need guns is in case the government wants to take over, or some such nonsense. It's all nonsense and unrealistic, KK. That's the point.
-----signature-----
"May you live all the days of your life"
"There's a special place in Hell for women who don't support other women."--Sarah Palin
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jabbadabbado
Title: Senate Floor Moderator
Registered:
Mar '99
|
Date Posted:
6/27 10:05am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
Laws that may require a gun to be locked up are ok, but not a law requiring a gun to have a trigger lock? It seems like unlocking a cabinet to get a gun would make self-defense more complicated then disengaging a trigger lock? Am I missing something here?
The ruling calls into question any regulatory impediment that slows down a gun owner in his or her own home in the effort to point and fire a gun in self defense.
Scalia opens the door, slightly, to regulation in the interest of preventing accidents.
-----signature-----
Malthusian Doomsday Quack
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 10:06am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
KnightWriter posted:
It's a bit set of "what ifs", that have no real foundation
Sort of like how people say that one of the reasons they need guns is in case the government wants to take over, or some such nonsense. It's all nonsense and unrealistic, KK. That's the point.
"The government" doesn't just refer to the federal government. Once again, look at the Battle of Athens. It is something that applies against all levels of government.
Here's the link again. It is a perfect demonstration. Unless you have something to refute that with, you really have no basis to call it "nonsense and unrealistic".
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
KnightWriter
Title:
Administrator Emeritus
Registered:
Nov '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 10:15am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
KnightWriter posted:
It's a bit set of "what ifs", that have no real foundation
Sort of like how people say that one of the reasons they need guns is in case the government wants to take over, or some such nonsense. It's all nonsense and unrealistic, KK. That's the point.
"The government" doesn't just refer to the federal government. Once again, look at the Battle of Athens. It is something that applies against all levels of government.
Here's the link again. It is a perfect demonstration. Unless you have something to refute that with, you really have no basis to call it "nonsense and unrealistic".
Kimball Kinnison
Sure I do. My own judgement and common sense works just fine for me. Sorry about that.
-----signature-----
"May you live all the days of your life"
"There's a special place in Hell for women who don't support other women."--Sarah Palin
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 10:37am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
KnightWriter posted:
Sure I do. My own judgement and common sense works just fine for me. Sorry about that.
You have the right to make your own conclusions, but not to make your own facts.
The Battle of Athens was essentially a case where corrupt officials had taken over running McMinn County, Tennessee, particularly in the sheriff's office. After many GIs returned from WWII, they discovered what had happened in the county while they were gone, and openly promised to fight it politically. In 1946, they formed a non-partisan group and put up candidates for local offices, to remove the corrupt officials. The sheriff's office attempted to use intimidation and force to block the GIs and their supporters from voting. When a black man who tried to vote was shot by one of the deputies, and two former GIs were detained, it led to an armed standoff at the polling place.
Other former GIs, using a combination of personal arms, some weapons borrowed from the nearby National Guard armory, and a little dynamite, joined in the standoff, which led to the deputies surrendering early the next morning. After the ballots were counted, the GIs had won most of the races, and the full conflict was resolved.
That is a clear, historical example of local government officials attempting to take over and being stopped by private citizens who were armed.
Similarly, there were the Deacons for Defense and Justice, who were armed private citizens who provided protection from the KKK (and others) to civil rights groups. That was a case where the government wasn't protecting them, and the private citizens are largely credited with helping to preserve the civil rights movement.
There are many examples that I could give of this sort of thing. This isn't some abstract "what if", but a very real set of conditions that have happened before in this country, and not just in the ancient past.
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
KnightWriter
Title:
Administrator Emeritus
Registered:
Nov '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 10:42am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
- Date Edited:
6/27 10:44am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
KnightWriter
|
|
KK, stop trying to lecture people (especially me). I'm not even reading your posts, and it's mostly just your time that you're wasting by writing stuff I'm not going to read, and probably only a few others will, if anyone. I understand that it frustrates you to no end that there's someone out there that you cannot run roughshod over by quoting and essaying to death, but here I am, and I'm sure I'm not alone. In an almost macabre sort of way, it's fascinating how you keep trying to use your logical and rhetorical ability to convince someone who clearly wants nothing to do with what you're selling. It's like you absolutely must be right, or have the last word.
-----signature-----
"May you live all the days of your life"
"There's a special place in Hell for women who don't support other women."--Sarah Palin
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 10:45am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
- Date Edited:
6/27 10:52am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Kimball_Kinnison
|
KnightWriter posted:
KK, stop trying to lecture people (especially me). I'm not even reading your posts, and it's mostly just your time that you're wasting by writing stuff I'm not going to read, and probably only a few others will, if anyone.
If you aren't here to actually discuss the issues, and you aren't going to do anything more than a few one-line posts, why do you even bother with the Senate anymore? You've basically shifted to only JCC-style posts.
So, why don't you start backing up your comments, like we've always asked people to do in the Senate, or else stop wasting everyone's time?
Kimball Kinnison
EDIT: Since you edited after posting to add a bit more:KnightWriter posted:
I understand that it frustrates you to no end that there's someone out there that you cannot run roughshod over by quoting and essaying to death, but here I am, and I'm sure I'm not alone. In an almost macabre sort of way, it's fascinating how you keep trying to use your logical and rhetorical ability to convince someone who clearly wants nothing to do with what you're selling. It's like you absolutely must be right, or have the last word.
Quite honestly, this reads more as a temper tantrum, as though you are saying "How dare you challenge my preconceptions with facts or data. Don't you know that I'm always right?"
If you don't want people to respond to your comments, don't post them in public. If you don't want someone to challenge your claims, statements, or positions, then you are definitely posting them in the wrong place.
If my posting counterexamples that go against your claims bothers you, then that's your problem. This is supposed to be a discussion forum, and I am supporting my side of the discussion. If you don't like that, no one forces you to post here.
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
KnightWriter
Title:
Administrator Emeritus
Registered:
Nov '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 10:54am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
- Date Edited:
6/27 10:59am (2 edits total)
Edited By:
KnightWriter
|
I post the way I've always posted, KK. You can go back through my earliest time here and you'll see that my posts are virtually identical to the way they are now, though due to health reasons, I simply can't fire off the occasional lengthy post the way I used to. I give my thoughts, more elaborate on some issues over others, but I've never been much for the logical structure you have. It's just not me. I was promoted as a moderator here in part because of my reasonable style, and though my views have changed quite a bit, I'm still about right in the middle of the serious posting spectrum (more serious than most in the JCC, less elaborate than many in the Senate).
Anyway, we're well off topic now. I must say that I am interested in what Jabba and others have had to say on this from a legal perspective. It's been enlightening.
Quite honestly, this reads more as a temper tantrum, as though you are saying "How dare you challenge my preconceptions with facts or data. Don't you know that I'm always right?"
I'm not always right. Far from it. It just never fails to be amusing that you simply don't know when to give up, or when someone just isn't interested in what you have to say. I am very interested in what Jabba, diz and some others have to say, and they're the folks I usually read.
It's okay to make your point with well thought our arguments. It should be applauded, really. But when someone (like me, in this case) says they're not really listening and aren't having what you're saying, the reasonable thing to do is to stop and move on.
This is supposed to be a discussion forum, and I am supporting my side of the discussion. If you don't like that, no one forces you to post here.
Except that many others are posting here, and I need not respond to you in particular to be part of the discussion.
-----signature-----
"May you live all the days of your life"
"There's a special place in Hell for women who don't support other women."--Sarah Palin
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Espaldapalabras
Registered:
Aug '05
|
Date Posted:
6/27 11:43am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
Some of us come here to see what people we disagree with have to say, and some only want to live in an echo chamber that tells them how smart they are.
KW, all our news sources are being turned into partisan outlets that tell one side or the other what they want to hear. If you a really right then you would do what most of the other liberals here do and defend yourself rather than covering your ears and screaming that you're not listening. I hardly ever agree with diz, but he generally attempts to give good explanations for why he thinks the way he does.
I don't have the time right now to write long posts or even read most of what is going on here, but I don't throw fits when somebody provides a counter example to my point.
To address the thread, with this decision the second amendment issue is removed from my list of things to care about. The NRA won the main point. I don't mind reasonable gun regulation, and we should probably have more of it in cities than in rural areas. I don't really see how even the most liberal court would overturn the decision outright in the future.
-----signature-----
A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.
Theodore Roosevelt
We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
6/27 11:44am
Subject:
RE: Oh second amendment strife, how I've missed you.
|
KnightWriter posted:
It's okay to make your point with well thought our arguments. It should be applauded, really. But when someone (like me, in this case) says they're not really listening and aren't having what you're saying, the reasonable thing to do is to stop and move on.
Except, until the last post of yours that I responded to, you hadn't expressed that you weren't interested in listening to what I had to say. Instead, you claimed I had missed your point, and responded to (very few) of the points I had made by calling them nonsense.
And in fact, your posting here has changed, especially in the past few years. You used to believe in and exhibit civility in your posts, and avoided personal commentary about others. Now, you are especially quick to make personal attacks (especially against me), and drag unrelated commentary about other users into the discussion. It used to be possible to respectfully disagree with you. Now, when someone disagrees you brush them off, or treat them like dirt because of the disagreement. You never used to do that until after you stepped down as an administrator (if I had to pick any specific point in time).
KnightWriter posted:
Except that many others are posting here, and I need not respond to you in particular to be part of the discussion.
And no one forces you to respond to me, not even me. If you don't want to respond to me, then don't. But if you do respond, don't expect me to simply ignore it.
I come here because I am seeking others' opinions. If I'm wrong about something, I actively encourage other people to point it out, and give me the evidence or logic that I am missing. As I've said many times before, I'm not perfect, nor do I know everything. I build my positions based on the best evidence and reason that I have.
If you think I'm wrong about something, then either we both have different evidence, our reasoning is different, or both. If my evidence is lacking, I want to know! If my reason is lacking, I want to know! I'm not here looking for an echo chamber where the only opinions are those that agree with mine, nor am I here to force everyone else to agree with me. I'm here specifically to discuss with those who disagree with me, and learn from it.
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
