-
In the practical, non theoretical sense the threat of gun violence is successfully being used to prevent publip discourse. I think the law in Utah is being used to protect the wrong people.
-
If that theory held any water, then the threat of gun violence would have kept the government from spying on us, would have prevented the oil wars, would have kept the bankers from raiding the cookie jar. There are some control fantasies being played out that are wrap than merely incorrect, they’re costing lives.
Well, the idea- And one which I advocate for- is that the second amendment was to be in lieu of a standing military.
No army, no SWAT teams. Mandatory national guard service for 2 years after high school, so everybody is properly trained in weapons and military discipline. If we suddenly need to fend of an invading army, put down an insurrection, or take down a dangerous criminal, we call up the able-bodied locals and deputize them to deal with the situation under the command of the local PD.
It means a fuckton less taxpayer expense, police forces who are less likely to open fire on peaceful demonstrations, inability for the government to physically subdue the populace, and the ability to raise 150 million troops if it were really that important to do so.
Largely by providing a social safety net?
Excuse me good sir, are you proposing that we strive to both keep our citizens alive by decreasing the number of shootings and then actually take care of them while they are alive?
Socialism! I shall take up arms to fight this scourge!
You’re going to invade Canada?
Having lived in the US & Canada for decades each I can attest to this being correct.
People don’t get as desperate, unhappy or marginalized up here.
Although there is way, way more to it, even just the medical care makes a huge difference.
Well, we have all these tanks that our police departments aren’t using…
Fill them with fuel oil and send them up. Winter’s coming…
You’re going to compromise Agent Harper’s mission! Think of the bigger picture!
I thought he was working for the Chinese… :^?
If the NSA knows who sent that email threat, they’ll use or ignore that knowledge from a realpolitik viewpoint. Their job is to break laws, not enforce them.
I’d have thought there was enough bacon down there already, maybe too much. I mean, every time the US has an election, I keep hearing about pork barrels like it was a bad thing or something…
But who are the Chinese working for?
If guns protect freedoms why do Americans have to pee in a cup to get a job as a security guard at WalMart?
Because that’s actually an intelligence test. If you pass it you don’t apply for that gig.
Dunno, but they own a good chunk of the tar sands, and Comrade Harper has never met an oil magnate he didn’t like.
Responsibility is a bugger… This discussion has everything else. Lets throw some cheap philosophy into the mix:
The First Bane of Sentience is Prognostication. Once our eyes open, we live in the future. For good or bad, we see the future coming. All joys, pains, sorrows and boredom is experienced twice. First in anticipation, then in corporeal. To close our eyes to the future is to revert back to the bestial eternal present.
The Second Bane of Sentience is Choice. As long as we are aware, we chose our future. We chose to act. We chose to not act. Either way, we chose. Our choices shout our presence to the endless void. To deny choice is the ultimate threat, the ultimate punishment.
The Third Bane of Sentience is Responsibility. Our Choices change the world. To deny that is to deny reality. Bearing Responsibility for the effects of our Choices is the greatest burden we can assume. For many the burden is too much. We have devised many tricks, many deceptions to shield us from the awful burden of Responsibility. But, we can’t fully engage with the world and people around us, until we realize that denied responsibility is a delusion.
5 cents please…
I thought that was your two cents worth?
Inflation’s a bitch.