“…Unfortunately, criminals have guns and therefore people must have
the right to own a weapon comparable to that of the intruder….” – SD

I agree. And, again, since often said ‘intruder/criminal’ is the
government itself….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMB-rnHo5eI&feature=PlayList&p=B9F278CD060484E8&playnext=1&index=4


On Feb 5, 7:53 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes Ian, the Constitution, the Bible and other works are merely
> representative of the time in which they were drafted.  I see them now
> as antiquated relics of the past.  However, laws aside, morals
> abandoned, let's address the issue for what it really is.  Our innate
> sense of fear and self preservation takes precedence over any and all
> law except the law of nature itself.   In ancient pre-gun history
> people defended themselves with weaponry that was relevant to the
> time.  No one did not own a sword because it was against the law to
> own.  Swords killed as it was their purpose to do so.  People did not
> hunt with swords, they used arrow and spear, but that is not the
> point.  When there was an intrusion whether upon a home or a community
> from a hostile neighboring clan, people gathered their weaponry to
> defend themselves.  They were not helpless due to a law that forbade
> them the right to own arms.  The intruders were no less and no more
> armed and the confrontation was on equal ground.   Weapons in our time
> have changed, even owning a gun may not match up to the weapon of the
> intruder should it be a machine gun, but what remains the same is the
> right to bear arms for self preservation.
> Now, if my government could "guarantee", which it can't, that no one
> will have possession of guns then I would feel more comfortable
> knowing that if an intruder broke into my home he would not have a
> firearm.  Unfortunately, criminals have guns and therefore people must
> have the right to own a weapon comparable to that of the intruder.
> No one can take away our right of self preservation via any means
> available.  You can't fight a war with rocks when the enemy has
> cannons.   Defending ourselves, as citizens, against criminals "IS" a
> war.  I know I can't depend on the police department as they might
> just as soon shoot me instead of the criminal.  I'd rather just simply
> disable the intruder and then call the police.
> Unfortunately, humans are a species which finds self predation a
> viable means of survival, it's cannibalism.  Don't have any money?
> Just kill your neighbor and take his.  Don't have any food? Just kill
> the people at the market and take what you need.  Need a car?  Just
> steal one from someone else.  It's the sad state of the human
> condition, it is sickness, it is sad, but as long as it is the way it
> is, I won't have any qualms about taking out some of the garbage.
> Obviously the government thinks it is better to put  murderers and
> rapists in prison for awhile and then let them out so they can kill
> and rape again.   Society would be better off without these defective
> people but probably the influence of chrisitians in government changed
> the way we mete out justice, not sure, just glad I'm not one.
>
> On Feb 5, 8:53 am, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 2009/2/5 Lee <[email protected]>
>
> > > My comment about America, is really my admision that I have no idea
> > > what should be done for the best there.  Many Americans will not give
> > > up their right to bear arms, and as it is enshrined in their law, then
> > > I really don't see why they should, however the title of this thread
> > > is Guns in Britain, and as a residant I say that we neither require
> > > them nor want them.
>
> > Lee, there does seem to be almost doctrinal reverence given to U.S.
> > Constitution and Bill of Rights. Being English I don't get it at all,
> > especially considering how continuously the articles are exploited beyond
> > their original purpose and all the ill that has come of them. Maybe the
> > Constitution would have been less like horseshit had Jefferson and Adams --
> > who have always struck me as the only sharp tools in a box of very dull ones
> > -- not been in France smoking opium during the Philadelphia Convention?
>
> > I'm mostly joking, of course, but I do hold to the point that writing
> > something down 218 years ago (which may have seemed like a really idea at
> > the time) is probably due a blank piece of a paper by now. Even Christians
> > treat the Bible like a wiki, maybe the Colonials should follow this example
> > with their moldy Constitution?
>
> > Ian- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to