On 02/23/2017 01:04 PM, Mirimir wrote:
On 02/23/2017 08:38 AM, Razer wrote:
On 02/23/2017 05:37 AM, jim bell wrote:
Court rules assault weapons are not protected under
Constitutionhttp://dailym.ai/2mmUuqG via
They aren't. You know why? When the Second Amendment was written, at 50
yards or so, you could literally outrun a musketball. If it didn't
bounce off your coat. Besides, "Your puny AK-47 is useless. So, we need
to have at least some of our volunteer resistance show up with Stinger
missiles, some anti-aircraft batteries, maybe a submarine or two?" I
hear Soros has a fleet of A-10 Warthogs he might call into service too
if you talk to him purty.
For a credible revolution, you need real weapons and supplies, and
people who know how to use them. So you need substantial involvement of
trained military and veterans. With small arms and insiders, you get the
real weapons and supplies.
That seems pretty unlikely in the US. And it it did go down, the result
would arguably be some mix of military dictatorship and feudalism.
<SNIP>
ROTF! To be a revolution you need an IDEOLOGY.
Greed is NOT an Ideology.
Greed is a way of life in 'Merica. The ONLY accepted way.
Social atomization has created the circumstance that 'Merican families
and communities are not even understood as such by a large majority of
the planet's inhabitants...
ROTF! 'Merica is Doooooooomed! Bwhahhhaaa!
Rr
"...Loneliness, estrangement, isolation describe the vast distance
between man and man today.
These dominant tendencies cannot be overcome by better personnel
management, nor by improved gadgets, but only when a love of man
overcomes the idolatrous worship of things by man....
...We regard men as infinitely precious and possessed of unfulfilled
capacities for reason, freedom, and love.
In affirming these principles we are aware of countering perhaps the
dominant conceptions of man in the twentieth century: that he is a
thing to be manipulated, and that he is inherently incapable of
directing his own affairs.
We oppose the depersonalization that reduces human beings to the
status of things -- if anything, the brutalities of the twentieth
century teach that means and ends are intimately related, that vague
appeals to "posterity" cannot justify the mutilations of the present.
We oppose, too, the doctrine of human incompetence because it rests
essentially on the modern fact that men have been "competently"
manipulated into incompetence -- we see little reason why men cannot
meet with increasing skill the complexities and responsibilities of
their situation, if society is organized not for minority, but for
majority, participation in decision-making.
Men have unrealized potential for self-cultivation, self-direction,
self-understanding, and creativity. It is this potential that we
regard as crucial and to which we appeal, not to the human
potentiality for violence, unreason, and submission to authority.
The goal of man and society should be human independence: a concern
not with image of popularity but with finding a meaning in life that
is personally authentic: a quality of mind not compulsively driven by
a sense of powerlessness, nor one which unthinkingly adopts status
values, nor one which represses all threats to its habits, but one
which has full, spontaneous access to present and past experiences,
one which easily unites the fragmented parts of personal history, one
which openly faces problems which are troubling and unresolved: one
with an intuitive awareness of possibilities, an active sense of
curiosity, an ability and willingness to learn.
This kind of independence does not mean egoistic individualism -- the
object is not to have one's way so much as it is to have a way that is
one's own." ~Port Huron Statement, Students for a Democratic Society.
