Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
I highlighted the part that should explain to you why there isn't any ongoing revolution at the current time.
Defending yourself against psychotic killers with more guns is just a vicious circle
No it's not. Human beings have the right to self-defense. When confronted with the threat of deadly force you are entitled to respond with deadly force. It's not a 'vicious circle'. The person defending themselves didn't make the decision that somebody was going to die -- that decision was made by the "psychotic killer" (to borrow your term). All the person defending themselves decided was that it wasn't going to be them who died that day.
Even in the EU you still have the right of self-defense. Of course they won't let you carry any tools to effectively exercise that right (in many EU countries you can't even carry pepper spray) but the right is still there. No country on this planet that I'm aware of expects you to lay down and surrender when some asshat is trying to end your life. You are entitled to fight back with any and all means at your disposal to ensure that you survive.
and additionally makes it a little bit harder to differentiate you from them when it comes to the crunch.
Give me a fucking break. It's very easy to differentiate us from them. We don't seek to use violence to control other people, obtain their property or end their lives. We only desire to go home to our families in one piece.
Indeed. It's a shame that only 2% of the senate is willing to stand up against this gross violation of transparency and democratic principles.
That really surprises you? Our Congress is anything but transparent. Bills aren't drafted in public and debated on the floor -- they are written behind closed doors by the Congressional leadership and only brought to the floor for some grandstanding in front of the C-SPAN cameras before the vote (whose outcome is already pre-determined) is taken. It's even worse in the House than the Senate. In the House you can't do ANYTHING without the approval of the leadership. We are supposed to have a House of Representatives but it's really a House of whatever [insert current speaker here] wants to allow to the floor.
Our Government stopped being about transparency and democratic principles a long time ago.
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
That's a pretty funny signature line for someone that claims to hate American gun-laws. How effective do you suppose the revolution is going to be without weapons in the hands of those who are revolting?
Maybe next time you should try reading my entire post before going off on a four paragraph rant. You might have noticed that I commented on the death penalty separately from the theory of paying back a debt to society.
the only evidence against him was the testimony of 9 witnesses. 7 of those have since claimed that their testimony was coerced by the police, and several even implicated one of the remaining two witnesses as the true killer.
Why aren't those 7 people in prison for perjury?
Sure, losing 40 years of your life for a crime you didn't commit is horrific, but it's a hell of a lot better than dying for it.
I disagree. I'd rather be executed than spend that much time behind bars for a crime I didn't commit. In fact I'd probably off myself in prison if the state was unwilling to do it for me.
People will NEVER pay for the long term lockup of violent offenders
Stop spending ~$43,000 per prisoner to house them in Club Fed and revert prison to what it should be: Three square meals and the chance to break big rocks into little rocks. Stop locking up non-violent druggies (you'll note that I was talking about violent crimes in my previous post) and use the free space/money to lock up violent criminals that actually pose a threat to the rest of us.
A shoplifter deserves a shot at rehabilitation. An armed robber does not. Both sought unearned material gain -- but the latter was willing to threaten violence against his fellow human beings in order to obtain it. Once you demonstrate that you are willing to do that then I don't think you deserve to live among the rest of us. You are no better than a rapid dog and deserve to be treated accordingly.
Capital punishment can encourage heinous crimes. If a suspect has already committed a crime that warrants capital punishment, then that suspect will have nothing to lose by committing more crimes.
I'm not convinced that most violent criminals are worried about what they have to lose. Take armed robbery for instance. People who hold up convenience stores rarely walk away with more than $100. For that marginal gain they are risking 10 to 20 years of their freedom, more if they used a weapon in the commission of their crime. No sane person could look at the risk to reward ratio of armed robbery and conclude that it's a worthwhile endeavor -- yet people still engage in such behavior.
I don't think the point of prison and/or the death penalty is to deter crime. Clearly neither one is effective at doing so. The point is to extract the debt that is owed to society for such behavior. The only method of payment for such debt is to require that you forfeit some of your limited time on this planet back to society.
In the case of the death penalty, if your crimes are heinous enough (treason, murder, kidnapping and rape should all qualify IMHO) then I don't see any problems with society putting you out of our collective misery. My only issue with the death penalty is the fact that no justice system is 100% perfect, although I'm not convinced that spending your entire life behind bars for a crime that you didn't commit is anymore humane than being executed for it.
We wouldn't need capital punishment if we'd lock violent criminals up for the rest of their miserable lives. The vast majority of first-time murderers already had violent criminal records. Seems to me that if we kept them behind bars where they belong that we'd have a much lower murder rate.
Right. In the U.S., fingerprints are kept indefinitely.
Not always. I was charged with a crime that I didn't commit a number of years ago. When the grand jury cleared me I received an 'order of dismissal' from the court. Among other things, this order required any and all police or governmental agencies with copies of my prints, DNA and photograph to destroy them.
Of course I later had to give up my prints to get my concealed carry license, so they've got them anyway, but not as a result of my arrest....
...when should we throw our end-of-the-world parties?
Today. I've already maxed out my credit cards and slept with the neighbors wife. I'd imagine he's gonna be pretty ticked off when he finds out but I'm hoping the LHC destroys the planet before he gets home;)
Democrats - what you get when the public realizes it can vote itself bread and circuses.
Dude, I've started to hate the Democrats myself but this last line of yours is utter bullshit. You realize that the GOP does the exact same thing, right? GWB tried to have his cake and eat it too -- massive tax cuts that he wouldn't even back off from when we went to war. For the first time in the history of the Republic we had a war without a tax increase to pay for it.
If that doesn't qualify as voting yourself bread and circuses then I don't know what does.
Nah, I have the self-control not to visit McDonalds. Besides, it tastes like ass and leaves me feeling like a POS after I eat it. My friends refer to it as toxic waste and they aren't far off the mark.
Funny that I got a troll mod for my remark above. I bet if I had said "that's why I exercised my right to free speech after Bush got elected" I would have received a +5 insightful. Gotta love hypocrites with mod points.
I think nothing could be better for the people of California. Tell the Federal Empire which robs us blind, kills our young men, and embroils us in endless overseas conflict to get lost. California would save tens of billions a year not paying taxes to the Empire, which we could turn around and use on our own infrastructure and defense. We have the eighth largest economy on our own, we don't need the American albatross hanging around our neck.
Good luck seceding from the union when you make it as hard as possible for your citizens to own firearms. I have to cough up a thumb print now to buy ammo in your fine state? Really? I hope you realize the rest of the country is laughing at you.
Otherwise, I'm going to keep pushing for as many bans as we can get until the stuff is outlawed completely
Then I hope you get what you deserve and catch a stray bullet from some criminal thug that decides to earn his living selling the product you just outlawed.
Whatever the merits or lack thereof of your arguments the fact that you can actually advocate prohibition with a straight face suggests to me that you haven't bothered to think through the consequences of the policies that you are advocating.
So if I want to run a bar where patrons get to urinate on anyone who walks through the door, or get to shoot anyone who walks in, that's ok by you? Nobody forced you there.
Nice strawman you got there.
I don't give up my right to be free from assault by toxic or noxious chemicals when I step on to land that is referred to in a government-issued piece of paper that someone holds. You have a natural right to control what goes on in your home; but occupying land for business purposes is a privilege subject to the common good.
If you don't like the fact that my business allows smoking then vote with your wallet and go somewhere else. Nobody is forcing you to remain on the property. You are free to leave at any time.
Using this same logic, since we still have murder even though it's against the law, let's just repeal the law against murder.
That's a stupid fucking comparison and you know it. Murder directly harms another human being. Smoking harms no one other than the person who decided to smoke despite being aware of the risks.
how most people that smoke start when they're too young to make informed decisions
Cry me a river. You can't buy tobacco until you are 18. At 18 you can make any number of stupid decisions that could prove far more detrimental to your long term health than smoking. It's called adulthood for a reason.
how much money we are spending on smoking-related illnesses that are damn close to 100% preventable?
Are you going to wage a war on obesity when you finish with smoking then? Let's tax and/or outlaw big macs. People aren't making informed decisions and need the government to protect them. Think of all the money we are spending on preventable heart disease and diabetes.
And stop trying to deflect the issue at hand.
Says the person who made a comparison between legalizing recreational substances and legalizing murder?
Frankly, the idea that only cops should have guns because they are trained is bull. Most citizens who have been raised around guns are going to be a better shot and better handling of firearms than these types.
No argument there. I've known a fair amount of cops that can't hit the broad side of a barn.
As for how this relates to why some areas are moving away from 9mm, its because they can't trust their cops to get a clean shot. If you can't get a clean shot, then 9 might not be enough. Same for 45, but its more likely to be.
Even if you practice every single day I don't think you can be assured that you'll get a clean shot. With a clean shot you could kill an aggressor with a.22 but that doesn't mean that you want to carry one around. I'm sure you have a better chance than the aforementioned cop who draws his gun once a year when it's time to re-qualify but it still isn't a sure thing and your ultimate success or failure may depend as much on luck as it does on skill.
About good JHP, there really is a difference between brands. "Good JHP" is very expensive, and many don't use it. They go for the cheap stuff because they think JHP is JHP.
I would hope that cops aren't using the cheap stuff. I do know my fair share of civilians that carry the cheap crap. Pretty stupid place to try and save money. It's your life we are talking about after all. Personally I carry golden sabers. I replace them every twelve months and when doing so fire off at least a hundred rounds of the new batch. If I have a jam or malfunction then I'm starting over from scratch after I identify the problem. I had to experiment with several different types of JHP before I found the most reliable one. It was expensive, but it's my life, not gonna cut corners.
Let's outlaw tobacco production and usage outright
What history books have you been reading that led you to conclude that such a law would be enforceable? All you'd accomplish is to drive tobacco production and consumption underground and to give criminals another revenue source.
Insist that it be regulated just like any other drug, based on an honest assessment of its risks and dangers
Like Alcohol?
Speaking of alcohol, assuming that I even agreed with you that tobacco should be outlawed or regulated, why would I assume that to be a job for Uncle Sam? At least when it was tried with alcohol they did it with an amendment to the constitution.
That's great. They can find the political will to prohibit smoking but they can't find the political will to give women a subway system that they can ride without being groped. Pathetic.
Imagine if that was happening in an American city on that scale.
Slashdot Mirror
Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
I highlighted the part that should explain to you why there isn't any ongoing revolution at the current time.
Defending yourself against psychotic killers with more guns is just a vicious circle
No it's not. Human beings have the right to self-defense. When confronted with the threat of deadly force you are entitled to respond with deadly force. It's not a 'vicious circle'. The person defending themselves didn't make the decision that somebody was going to die -- that decision was made by the "psychotic killer" (to borrow your term). All the person defending themselves decided was that it wasn't going to be them who died that day.
Even in the EU you still have the right of self-defense. Of course they won't let you carry any tools to effectively exercise that right (in many EU countries you can't even carry pepper spray) but the right is still there. No country on this planet that I'm aware of expects you to lay down and surrender when some asshat is trying to end your life. You are entitled to fight back with any and all means at your disposal to ensure that you survive.
and additionally makes it a little bit harder to differentiate you from them when it comes to the crunch.
Give me a fucking break. It's very easy to differentiate us from them. We don't seek to use violence to control other people, obtain their property or end their lives. We only desire to go home to our families in one piece.
Indeed. It's a shame that only 2% of the senate is willing to stand up against this gross violation of transparency and democratic principles.
That really surprises you? Our Congress is anything but transparent. Bills aren't drafted in public and debated on the floor -- they are written behind closed doors by the Congressional leadership and only brought to the floor for some grandstanding in front of the C-SPAN cameras before the vote (whose outcome is already pre-determined) is taken. It's even worse in the House than the Senate. In the House you can't do ANYTHING without the approval of the leadership. We are supposed to have a House of Representatives but it's really a House of whatever [insert current speaker here] wants to allow to the floor.
Our Government stopped being about transparency and democratic principles a long time ago.
which we also think for your gun-laws
Sorry if our freedom is offensive to you.
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
That's a pretty funny signature line for someone that claims to hate American gun-laws. How effective do you suppose the revolution is going to be without weapons in the hands of those who are revolting?
Too bad one of those women didn't have a firearm. Might have ended differently.
Maybe next time you should try reading my entire post before going off on a four paragraph rant. You might have noticed that I commented on the death penalty separately from the theory of paying back a debt to society.
the only evidence against him was the testimony of 9 witnesses. 7 of those have since claimed that their testimony was coerced by the police, and several even implicated one of the remaining two witnesses as the true killer.
Why aren't those 7 people in prison for perjury?
Sure, losing 40 years of your life for a crime you didn't commit is horrific, but it's a hell of a lot better than dying for it.
I disagree. I'd rather be executed than spend that much time behind bars for a crime I didn't commit. In fact I'd probably off myself in prison if the state was unwilling to do it for me.
People will NEVER pay for the long term lockup of violent offenders
Stop spending ~$43,000 per prisoner to house them in Club Fed and revert prison to what it should be: Three square meals and the chance to break big rocks into little rocks. Stop locking up non-violent druggies (you'll note that I was talking about violent crimes in my previous post) and use the free space/money to lock up violent criminals that actually pose a threat to the rest of us.
A shoplifter deserves a shot at rehabilitation. An armed robber does not. Both sought unearned material gain -- but the latter was willing to threaten violence against his fellow human beings in order to obtain it. Once you demonstrate that you are willing to do that then I don't think you deserve to live among the rest of us. You are no better than a rapid dog and deserve to be treated accordingly.
Capital punishment can encourage heinous crimes. If a suspect has already committed a crime that warrants capital punishment, then that suspect will have nothing to lose by committing more crimes.
I'm not convinced that most violent criminals are worried about what they have to lose. Take armed robbery for instance. People who hold up convenience stores rarely walk away with more than $100. For that marginal gain they are risking 10 to 20 years of their freedom, more if they used a weapon in the commission of their crime. No sane person could look at the risk to reward ratio of armed robbery and conclude that it's a worthwhile endeavor -- yet people still engage in such behavior.
I don't think the point of prison and/or the death penalty is to deter crime. Clearly neither one is effective at doing so. The point is to extract the debt that is owed to society for such behavior. The only method of payment for such debt is to require that you forfeit some of your limited time on this planet back to society.
In the case of the death penalty, if your crimes are heinous enough (treason, murder, kidnapping and rape should all qualify IMHO) then I don't see any problems with society putting you out of our collective misery. My only issue with the death penalty is the fact that no justice system is 100% perfect, although I'm not convinced that spending your entire life behind bars for a crime that you didn't commit is anymore humane than being executed for it.
I just don't think I have the stomach for it.
We wouldn't need capital punishment if we'd lock violent criminals up for the rest of their miserable lives. The vast majority of first-time murderers already had violent criminal records. Seems to me that if we kept them behind bars where they belong that we'd have a much lower murder rate.
Right. In the U.S., fingerprints are kept indefinitely.
Not always. I was charged with a crime that I didn't commit a number of years ago. When the grand jury cleared me I received an 'order of dismissal' from the court. Among other things, this order required any and all police or governmental agencies with copies of my prints, DNA and photograph to destroy them.
Of course I later had to give up my prints to get my concealed carry license, so they've got them anyway, but not as a result of my arrest....
Especially if, right after you inhaled, we told you how much that lungful cost. (About $7k.)
Don't worry, I borrowed a page from 42's playbook and didn't inhale...... ;)
...when should we throw our end-of-the-world parties?
Today. I've already maxed out my credit cards and slept with the neighbors wife. I'd imagine he's gonna be pretty ticked off when he finds out but I'm hoping the LHC destroys the planet before he gets home ;)
Democrats - what you get when the public realizes it can vote itself bread and circuses.
Dude, I've started to hate the Democrats myself but this last line of yours is utter bullshit. You realize that the GOP does the exact same thing, right? GWB tried to have his cake and eat it too -- massive tax cuts that he wouldn't even back off from when we went to war. For the first time in the history of the Republic we had a war without a tax increase to pay for it.
If that doesn't qualify as voting yourself bread and circuses then I don't know what does.
Nah, I have the self-control not to visit McDonalds. Besides, it tastes like ass and leaves me feeling like a POS after I eat it. My friends refer to it as toxic waste and they aren't far off the mark.
Funny that I got a troll mod for my remark above. I bet if I had said "that's why I exercised my right to free speech after Bush got elected" I would have received a +5 insightful. Gotta love hypocrites with mod points.
Personally, I think freedom always comes with a responsibility of helping to maintain it.
That's why I bought a gun after the Democrats swept into power. If you don't exercise your rights you'll lose them.
Apparently your solution for them, is "tough shit"...force them to sell the home they raised their kids in
I wasn't aware that there was a constitutionally protected right not to have to move when economic conditions change.
take the proceeds and go live in the slums where they can afford the taxes
Hyperbole much? If their property values went up so much in the last 40 years, why would they need to move to the slums if they sold their house?
I think nothing could be better for the people of California. Tell the Federal Empire which robs us blind, kills our young men, and embroils us in endless overseas conflict to get lost. California would save tens of billions a year not paying taxes to the Empire, which we could turn around and use on our own infrastructure and defense. We have the eighth largest economy on our own, we don't need the American albatross hanging around our neck.
Good luck seceding from the union when you make it as hard as possible for your citizens to own firearms. I have to cough up a thumb print now to buy ammo in your fine state? Really? I hope you realize the rest of the country is laughing at you.
Butchering words is how languages grow and develop.
I'm still in favor of the death penalty for people who abuse the word 'like'. Like, ya know what I'm like talking about, like ok?
Otherwise, I'm going to keep pushing for as many bans as we can get until the stuff is outlawed completely
Then I hope you get what you deserve and catch a stray bullet from some criminal thug that decides to earn his living selling the product you just outlawed.
Whatever the merits or lack thereof of your arguments the fact that you can actually advocate prohibition with a straight face suggests to me that you haven't bothered to think through the consequences of the policies that you are advocating.
So if I want to run a bar where patrons get to urinate on anyone who walks through the door, or get to shoot anyone who walks in, that's ok by you? Nobody forced you there.
Nice strawman you got there.
I don't give up my right to be free from assault by toxic or noxious chemicals when I step on to land that is referred to in a government-issued piece of paper that someone holds. You have a natural right to control what goes on in your home; but occupying land for business purposes is a privilege subject to the common good.
If you don't like the fact that my business allows smoking then vote with your wallet and go somewhere else. Nobody is forcing you to remain on the property. You are free to leave at any time.
Using this same logic, since we still have murder even though it's against the law, let's just repeal the law against murder.
That's a stupid fucking comparison and you know it. Murder directly harms another human being. Smoking harms no one other than the person who decided to smoke despite being aware of the risks.
how most people that smoke start when they're too young to make informed decisions
Cry me a river. You can't buy tobacco until you are 18. At 18 you can make any number of stupid decisions that could prove far more detrimental to your long term health than smoking. It's called adulthood for a reason.
how much money we are spending on smoking-related illnesses that are damn close to 100% preventable?
Are you going to wage a war on obesity when you finish with smoking then? Let's tax and/or outlaw big macs. People aren't making informed decisions and need the government to protect them. Think of all the money we are spending on preventable heart disease and diabetes.
And stop trying to deflect the issue at hand.
Says the person who made a comparison between legalizing recreational substances and legalizing murder?
Frankly, the idea that only cops should have guns because they are trained is bull. Most citizens who have been raised around guns are going to be a better shot and better handling of firearms than these types.
No argument there. I've known a fair amount of cops that can't hit the broad side of a barn.
As for how this relates to why some areas are moving away from 9mm, its because they can't trust their cops to get a clean shot. If you can't get a clean shot, then 9 might not be enough. Same for 45, but its more likely to be.
Even if you practice every single day I don't think you can be assured that you'll get a clean shot. With a clean shot you could kill an aggressor with a .22 but that doesn't mean that you want to carry one around. I'm sure you have a better chance than the aforementioned cop who draws his gun once a year when it's time to re-qualify but it still isn't a sure thing and your ultimate success or failure may depend as much on luck as it does on skill.
About good JHP, there really is a difference between brands. "Good JHP" is very expensive, and many don't use it. They go for the cheap stuff because they think JHP is JHP.
I would hope that cops aren't using the cheap stuff. I do know my fair share of civilians that carry the cheap crap. Pretty stupid place to try and save money. It's your life we are talking about after all. Personally I carry golden sabers. I replace them every twelve months and when doing so fire off at least a hundred rounds of the new batch. If I have a jam or malfunction then I'm starting over from scratch after I identify the problem. I had to experiment with several different types of JHP before I found the most reliable one. It was expensive, but it's my life, not gonna cut corners.
Let's outlaw tobacco production and usage outright
What history books have you been reading that led you to conclude that such a law would be enforceable? All you'd accomplish is to drive tobacco production and consumption underground and to give criminals another revenue source.
Insist that it be regulated just like any other drug, based on an honest assessment of its risks and dangers
Like Alcohol?
Speaking of alcohol, assuming that I even agreed with you that tobacco should be outlawed or regulated, why would I assume that to be a job for Uncle Sam? At least when it was tried with alcohol they did it with an amendment to the constitution.
That's great. They can find the political will to prohibit smoking but they can't find the political will to give women a subway system that they can ride without being groped. Pathetic.
Imagine if that was happening in an American city on that scale.