DeletedUser40473
cause ALL the country's will give up there guns. guns aint the problem its the people who hold the guns. just make it where u have to get a background check and stuff to buy one
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
DeletedUser
And yet we're told we owe our freedom to our military...and that's part of the government.How exactly can anyone other than the government limit your freedoms under protection of the law?
Government, by definition (to govern), can only limit freedoms. Freedom does not originate in government. Unless of course you care to have the freedom to do as you are told ...
.
DeletedUser40495
Do you think the enemies of this country who want to take away our freedom would be “abiding by laws” to do it? If there was an armed Communist rebellion in the United States would that be legal? Or if another country invaded us unprovoked? Wouldn’t that be a war crime?
People can defy laws you know, and the government exists to protect us from that. To protect our freedom.
Stop pretending that everything is always all peachy and that there is nobody out there who wants to take what you have. Because unfortunately this world is not perfect.
Nope. The government exists not to limit freedom but to prevent anarchy (which is what we would have if there was no government in place). Preventing anarchy actually gives us more freedom. Freedom to know that we are safe and can do whatever we want (provided it doesn’t interfere with the freedom of others).Government, by definition (to govern), can only limit freedoms. Freedom does not originate in government. Unless of course you care to have the freedom to do as you are told ...
.
Not that some governments aren’t corrupt. Many do take away freedoms, but saying that “governing” simply means “taking away freedom” is the opposite of true. Yes you are correct that the freedom doesn’t come from the government. But a good government does not exist to take that freedom away, only to defend it for everyone.
DeletedUser36572
By “invading this country” I suppose you mean with planes, soldiers, guns and bombs ... But you may be surprised it is easier to invade with women and children.
The government has a hard enough time protecting itself, and doesn’t give a whit about you.
.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser36572
I am a veteran and I have never told you that.
But ... Then Again, I wasn’t fighting for the flag or country. I was fighting for the poor bastard next to me, the mission and the prospect some of us may actually make it home alive. Of course if you haven’t actually served your country, you may not understand that.
But hey, free college (for whatever that was worth nowadays) was available and a benefit earned.
.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser40495
You are correct that the government certainly doesn’t give much though to individuals. The government cares about the people as a whole. I never said that the government specifically cares about me as an individual, though I do believe that the government cares about me indirectly (because it cares about the people it governs over and I am one of them).
I don’t deny this at all, but any attempt to overthrow the government (a military attempt, or an attempt by as you say, women and children) is against the law (it would be treason in both cases). Either way, my point was that it is impossible to overthrow freedom without breaking some sort of law (unless the laws are completely inept, which ours certainly are not).
DeletedUser40495
Your purpose for serving (and whether or not Stephen knows what it is like to serve in the military) has nothing to do with what he said about our country owing it’s freedom to the military. Even if every single soldier in the United States Military was only fighting to pay for college and to protect the people fighting with them (with no regard for their country) that would not change what they are doing. And what they are doing is protecting our country (and therefore our freedom).
This means that, yes, as citizens we do owe our freedom to the military, whether or not the individual soldiers want that recognition.
DeletedUser36572
Well ... I am glad you feel the government cares.
It’s not uncommon to to believe it would, seeing as people tend to believe they are caring people when they use the government to secure resources from one individual in order to provide for another with no concern for the origin on debt.
If you think it is illegal to invade this country with women and children ... Well it is. If you think it is treasonous to aid and abed in the said illegal activity, you might want to head to our southern boarder.
If you think they cannot overthrow the government or infringe upon our freedoms, I would beg to differ. It’s pretty obvious there are people in this country who want nothing less.
.
DeletedUser36572
The comment about college was only added to dovetail with recent calls for free college tuition. You can earn a free college education.
Otherwise, I don’t expect someone who has not served to fully understand the implications of the rest ... And stated that.
.
UBERhelp1
Well-Known Member
This thread quite literally represents the reason I try my best to avoid political conversations. Everyone has their opinion on what, how, and why things should be done, and nothing anyone else says will ever change those biases. There is no point in saying your opinion, as it will only turn others' view of you worse. Add to that arguing over points that, as previously mentioned, won't change anything, and it becomes a dog chasing its own tail. There is nothing to gain.
DeletedUser36572
Welcome Aboard ...
Your opinion on the matter is duly noted.
Fortunately substance is not a requirement.
.
DeletedUser40495
So you are saying that illegal immigrants are taking away our freedoms? I’m not going to argue that.
But if that is the case, the government is certainly protecting our freedom by capturing and deporting them (possibly to the point of a lack of understanding, but defending our country nonetheless).
Yes. They can. Never said that they couldn’t. Which is one of the reasons the government exists to protect our freedom.
DeletedUser
Good for you...but irrelevant. My point was that the popular theme in this country is that we owe our freedoms to the military, and the military is part of the government. So if we owe our freedoms to the military/government, then your comment about government standing between us and our freedoms is just wrong.
cton2.forge
Active Member
A completely non-political and semantic observation from a philosophy major (always knew that thing would come in handy one day).
Freedoms exist in a free state uninhibited by any forms of external entities (i.e. governments). Liberties are given or provided, generally by things like laws. Laws limit freedoms in order to provide liberty; Governments curtail absolute freedoms in order to provide liberty. The 'noble savage' enters the yoke of society and surrenders his freedoms in order to be guaranteed liberty from being subjected by others. Blah blah blah social contract blah blah blah.
I'm a vet too. Not the animal kind. Didn't know if anyone was keeping tabs here or what.
Not that there's anything wrong with being the animal kind. But the philosophy degree won't get me in the door there. Unfortunately.
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
And it doesn't work there. Knife attacks off the charts, acid attacks, immigrant child sex grooming rings and rape gangs. Seems they could use some guns in there world.
Freshmeboy
Well-Known Member
Interesting philosophy Razor...now you are saying guns will prevent the evil deeds of man....? Keep digging...
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
No. I'm saying guns are the weapon we need as individuals to fight against the evil deeds of men. Seems concealed carry would bring knife attacks to zero pretty quickly. Also, women who carry tend not to get raped. We do not live in a utopia, you're a fool to live like you do.
DeletedUser
Statements that are completely speculative and not backed up by actual happenings are not very convincing except to people that already agree with you. If you believe carrying a concealed weapon would protect you against a knife attack or protect a woman against a rapist, you are the one living in a fool's paradise. (Hint: Neither attacker would alert you before attacking.)
DeletedUser40495
I agree with Razorback on this one, if guns are completely banned for public use, some people will still be able to get them illegally. And those will probably be the people who intend to do bad things with them. Nah, it’s best to just let everyone have guns, so at least everyone has a legal way to defend themselves from the inevitable.
DeletedUser
Inevitable? Hardly. And I certainly don't advocate a complete gun ban. A handgun for home defense (not to be carried in public) and rifles for hunting are fine by me. Rifles, not semi-automatic people-killers. There is no moral or logical justification for a private citizen to have legal access to semi-automatic weapons or accessories, such as high capacity magazines or bump stocks, that have no purpose but to facilitate killing more people faster.