Advances in non-lethal defense make the 2nd amendment unnecessary

[shortylickens]

Totally agreed. :thumbsup:

Already reported it. They dont care.

 

[Nemesis 1]

If you were starting over in civil society, non-lethal defense has come a long way in the past 50 years. Things like tasers, pepper stray, pepper balls, and mace, not to mention electronic surveillance and home security systems, remote surveillance, etc.

Basically means that for all practical purposes, guns really are unnecessary in a civil society. There is hunting, I suppose, but there are also crossbows for that.

If you think about the danger of "false positives", non-lethal defense tools provide something like 90% of the protection of the gun with 10% of the downsides.

That leads the "armed revolution" fantasy, which is based on paranoia since we live in a democratic society and revolutions are carried out at the ballot box.

You want everyones guns , After reading your other post , I understand that , Who did you say you work for again.

 

[Nemesis 1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRukUtuIyFo

I'm not saying that police shouldn't have guns. I think they should.

I am saying though that for ordinary citizens who do not have to deal with criminals on a daily basis like the police, a real gun is literally overkill.

You want the good guys to have the guns , That sounds OK . NOT!
Whos to stop the good guys from becoming bad guys . You do know what laws were passed and signed on Jan1, 2012 correct . Check gun sales in the USA today . Good luck getting those guns , Ya might catch a bullet but the guns stay in citizen hands.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I going to be honest . The op has caused a move in the time line . That which was in the hands of a good man has been let loose .
The OP is all about this . Anyone in south western states seen trails or any sort of signs with the UN printed on them. They are moving really fast now Paul has shaken the basket of mobster in the UN and the US government .
Believe it or not . Ha I know the replies . The war started we missed that part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zP7_koRXQ

 

[JSt0rm]

I going to be honest . The op has caused a move in the time line . That which was in the hands of a good man has been let loose .
The OP is all about this . Anyone in south western states seen trails or any sort of signs with the UN printed on them. They are moving really fast now Paul has shaken the basket of mobster in the UN and the US government .
Believe it or not . Ha I know the replies . The war started we missed that part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zP7_koRXQ

Why are you so crazy?

 

[shortylickens]

I going to be honest . The op has caused a move in the time line . That which was in the hands of a good man has been let loose .
The OP is all about this . Anyone in south western states seen trails or any sort of signs with the UN printed on them. They are moving really fast now Paul has shaken the basket of mobster in the UN and the US government .
Believe it or not . Ha I know the replies . The war started we missed that part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zP7_koRXQ

I swear to god I have no idea what you just said.

 

[JSt0rm]

lol

 

[CallMeJoe]

I swear to god I have no idea what you just said.

I've been trying to find a Gibberish/English dictionary so that I can translate Nemesis' posts. No luck so far.

 

[JSt0rm]

I love how he edited the post. Like wtf could he of edited in that jumble?

 

[shortylickens]

Reminds me of that cockney girl in Chicken Run.
Mel Gibson looks at her and says "I swear thats not English".

 

[CallMeJoe]

I love how he edited the post. Like wtf could he of edited in that jumble?

Perhaps he found a phrase that was almost coherent...

 

[Nemesis 1]

QUOTE=CallMeJoe;33000982]I've been trying to find a Gibberish/English dictionary so that I can translate Nemesis' posts. No luck so far.[/QUOTE]

Maybe Nemesis really doesn't care if YOU understand . Maybe Nemesis is talking to someone other than YOU. I know for fact your blind to the universe around you. So it is possiable Nemesis isn't even adderessing this forum . It is a FACT that this issue here has more meaning and carries more consequences than you could possiably fathom. I believe in GOD and I know for fact there is life after death . That I know as fact ,

Another fact . The GOD of the bible . Is it real . Yes it is . But its not god at all . Their friends good friends. A few of you very few Might even meet them. Earths powers are a freaken joke in comparison, They were going to make themselves known. There was great debate . An earthling in the end showed them how they would be wrong to intervene. Man has got to be gathered to meet its end. This is what man prophesy about the end . They lied about everthing . So its only fitting they should meet their end as prophesy. Befor intervention can take place. With more debate they agreeded with this earthling That Man must be tempered in the furnance of steel and quenched in blood. Well I hope that I stated that in a manner which does not create a quagmire of self sinewy. So whats this mean . I really can't say . Maybe THE ONE is a little gamer who desires to snatch victory from the Jaws of great leader whos mouth does utter pomposity for himself and his bloodline.

 

[irishScott]

Maybe Nemesis really doesn't care if YOU understand . Maybe Nemesis is talking to someone other than YOU. I know for fact your blind to the universe around you. So it is possiable Nemesis isn't even adderessing this forum . It is a FACT that this issue here has more meaning and carries more consequences than you could possiably fathom. I believe in GOD and I know for fact there is life after death . That I know as fact ,

Another fact . The GOD of the bible . Is it real . Yes it is . But its not god at all . Their friends good friends. A few of you very few Might even meet them. Earths powers are a freaken joke in comparison, They were going to make themselves known. There was great debate . An earthling in the end showed them how they would be wrong to intervene. Man has got to be gathered to meet its end . Befor intervention can take place. With more debate they agreeded with this earthling That Man must be tempered in the furnance of steel and quenched in blood. Well I hope that I stated that in a manner which does not create a quagmire of self sinewy. So whats this mean . I really can't say . Maybe THE ONE is a little gamer who desires to snatch victory from the Jaws of great leader whos mouth does utter pomposity for himself and his bloodline.

So Odin and the Asguardians are waiting for the apocalypse of midguard before coming in to fix things. Sweet!

 

[irishScott]

Perhaps he found a phrase that was almost coherent...

Meh, apparently he thinks the UN Arms Trade Treaty is somehow moving to gain support in the southwest, all thanks to Ron Paul who ruffled some feathers and spurred them into action. It's still crazy, but at least it's a concept...

 

[Howard]

Anyway, I can't wait for lightsabers.

 

[micrometers]

Are you really sticking up for the worthless lives of muggers who attempted to rob someone?

Bernie's only fault was that he did not kill all of them.

Bernie also suffered in the years after this event. I agree that he was fully justified and was acting in self defense, and that the four were likely going to mug him (which not everyone sees), but also a jury verdict was made against him for like $46 million in the aftermath, where one of the guys had his spine severed and is paralyzed.

I'm just saying that it is possible that Mr. Goetz's life would have been better if he had just maced them and gotten away.

 

[leper84]

Ect...

I only hope that God forbid someday you need to protect yourself, or your family, that you have access to a firearm.

 

[PrinceofWands]

If you were starting over in civil society, non-lethal defense has come a long way in the past 50 years. Things like tasers, pepper stray, pepper balls, and mace, not to mention electronic surveillance and home security systems, remote surveillance, etc.

Basically means that for all practical purposes, guns really are unnecessary in a civil society. There is hunting, I suppose, but there are also crossbows for that.

If you think about the danger of "false positives", non-lethal defense tools provide something like 90% of the protection of the gun with 10% of the downsides.

That leads the "armed revolution" fantasy, which is based on paranoia since we live in a democratic society and revolutions are carried out at the ballot box.

Pretty much everything you said is exactly, totally wrong in every way. Not going to waste my time on people like you, so I'll just leave it at this:

If you want my firearms, come try to take them. The ONLY way they could ever be removed from America is one dead owner at a time. The bottom line is, there are FAR too many of us to win that fight.

 

[BladeVenom]

Anti-gun fanatics need to have governments give up their guns first. The worst atrocities in history have been committed by governments.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Anyway, I can't wait for lightsabers.

While cool, anyone who uses a range limited weapon is dead. Luke attacks Jack O'Neill. Jack sprays him with a P90. Huge drunken wake of whiny Jedi follows.

 

[NetWareHead]

Bernie also suffered in the years after this event. I agree that he was fully justified and was acting in self defense, and that the four were likely going to mug him (which not everyone sees), but also a jury verdict was made against him for like $46 million in the aftermath, where one of the guys had his spine severed and is paralyzed.

I'm just saying that it is possible that Mr. Goetz's life would have been better if he had just maced them and gotten away.

You dont know that for sure. When it is a wolf pack of muggers against me, a gun is the only thing I would want in my hand. You don't know what their intentions are. Mace/pepper spray or other non lethal methods are not guaranteed to do the job. If you are a reasonable enough shot, not saying you even have to kill the muggers, you stop their attack, which is exactly what happened. Bernie was able to live. That is all that is important to me. The potential victim survived. I don;'t care about how much hurt the muggers had to go through. They asked for it by participating in criminal activity and ganging up on a man in the subway.

It is our messed up justice system, this point may be a topic for another post, that permitted the muggers to bring a civil suit and win. That should have never happened.

Regardless, if he had killed all of them, it would have been his word only and since dead men cant testify, Bernie would have never had to go through the civil suit. Bernie should have shot more carefully and buried all of them.

 

[Vic Vega]

OP is scared if freedom.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

 

[rudder]

Let's take a hypothetical. Bernie Goetz.

What if instead of a gun he had had a can of mace instead?

The answer: he probably would have gotten away from this potential mugging okay. He would not have had any court trouble. The four young men who were criminal at the time would not have had this amount of pain inflicted on them.

No, he would have sprayed one person in the face and gotten a severe, likely lethal, beat down by the rest.

 

[Ninjahedge]

I always get a kick out of gun "lovers" going off the deep end whenever they "defend their rights" on this.

You never see a pistol owner coming in and saying "hey, while I do think that the original item in the bill of rights is not meant for today's world, there are some things that still hold merit".

Instead, we get the "pry it from my cold dead fingers" crowd that attach an EMOTIONAL weight to an inanimate object whose only purpose is harm/death (which can be associated, in a secondary sense, to "protection" and other appellations).

It is a tool, a deadly one. it has its uses and cannot just be unilaterally thrown by the wayside. But treating it with the same heartfelt love and devotion as, say, freedom of speech is just laughable.

We already live in a society where our "own" armies and National Guard outpaces our private ownership to a degree that claiming right to own a weapon for its original intent (local defense and local militias as opposed to a national rule) is laughable.

Gun advocates either need to redress the argument to fit modern times or give up this simplistic childish clinging to an amendment that is nowhere near its original intent and application.



Final shot, if the original intent was kept from the beginning, any citizen should have the "right" to their own private armaments. FULLY automatic AR's and 50cals. Tanks, APC's and other WoW.

Ownership of modern weapons of war far outstrip the weapons of old. Unless we go back to a provincial militia model, fighting for the right to bear arms holds no weight against reality.

 

[BoberFett]

You never see a pistol owner coming in and saying "hey, while I do think that the original item in the bill of rights is not meant for today's world, there are some things that still hold merit".

Actually, it is meant for today's world. Why would you expect people to say something that isn't true?

It is a tool, a deadly one. it has its uses and cannot just be unilaterally thrown by the wayside. But treating it with the same heartfelt love and devotion as, say, freedom of speech is just laughable.

Again, you're completely wrong.

We already live in a society where our "own" armies and National Guard outpaces our private ownership to a degree that claiming right to own a weapon for its original intent (local defense and local militias as opposed to a national rule) is laughable.

Wrong yet again, for any number of reasons that are explained elsewhere so there's no need to go into it here in detail. Suffice it to say, an armed citizenry is every bit a match for our military.

Gun advocates either need to redress the argument to fit modern times or give up this simplistic childish clinging to an amendment that is nowhere near its original intent and application.

Ah yes, ad hominems. Call them children, that's a sure way to make your point.

Final shot, if the original intent was kept from the beginning, any citizen should have the "right" to their own private armaments. FULLY automatic AR's and 50cals. Tanks, APC's and other WoW.

50 caliber rifles are legal. How many crimes have been committed with them? You're wrong on so many points it's embarassing.

Ownership of modern weapons of war far outstrip the weapons of old. Unless we go back to a provincial militia model, fighting for the right to bear arms holds no weight against reality.

That will be true when freedom of the press applies only to newspapers and not the internet. Because surely nobody back then would have predicted the damage that could be done from misinformation spread around the globe instantly.

In closing: you're completely, utterly, absolutely wrong.