Reply to What does it take to get a little gun control

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "What does it take to get a little gun control "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The objective is to stop mass shootings.  If they stop shooting children because they are afraid of guards they will instead shoot up synagogues or churches or shopping malls or picnics or street festivals or whatever else.  You're missing the point with "children" - yes, we want to protect children but we want to protect everyone else too.  Why are you caving to psychopaths saying "you can't have the kids but everyone else is fair game?"[/quote]

Okay, what’s your plan, who will it save, and how? There are 400m guns in America. I am all ears. All I ask is that you work within the framework of the 2nd, 4th and 14th Amendments.[/quote]

Australia is a good example of what can and should be done.[/quote]

Does Australia have a 2nd Amendment?[/quote]

Not relevant.  As others have pointed out Constitutional amendments are not absolute, and Australia did not pass a total ban.  But what they did accomplish is a virtual end to mass shootings since passing their reform almost 30 years ago.  And guess what, they did not descend into tyranny or crime waves where only criminals have guns and all of the other rationales gun-clingers cite.  So their arguments are not valid.[/quote]

They locked their people up during COVID.  They have the worst form of tyranny: anarcho-tyranny.  Their tyrants have replaced their population with hostile foreigners despite Australians not voting for such a takeover.  As another example, you can look what his happening in England, where tyrants are trying to rule that migrants take priority over natives, and little girls are allowed to be attacked but not defend themselves.

These are sad times for the Anglosphere. [/quote]

And do you know why this is the case in the UK and Australia?

The UK and Australia have faced significant labor shortages in various sectors, including healthcare, agriculture, and hospitality. Many industries rely on migrant workers to fill these gaps, as they often take on roles that are hard to fill with local labor, in mostly due to low wages and working conditions.  That said, even with low wages migrants still contribute to the tax base, thereby paying for government services, projects, etc... (and supporting the salaries of bureaucrats).  Migrant advocacy groups are also very vocal in politics, staging protests that garner media attention that is uncomfortable for those in power.

As for the topic at hand, neither the UK nor Australia have the Second Amendment (nor are other rights, like those in the First Amendment, treated with the same reverence as in the U.S.)  The Second Amendment serves a very important purpose in the U.S., one that has staved off the types of authoritarian actions of the UK and Australian governments.  Judge Alex Kozinski’s dissent in Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F. 3d 567 (9th Cir. 2003) put it best:

[i]All too many of the other great tragedies of history — Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few — were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. … If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed — where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.[/i][/quote]

They have labor shortages because capital owners are greedy and prefer to pay foreigners cheaper salaries instead of paying their fellow countrymen a reasonable wage.

The Second Amendment is absolute, though.  That history is mostly right.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics