2nd Amendment

[DawgyNWindow]

Freedom of the press as defined by the founding fathers (same argument):

[PawDawg]

You are using that phrase incorrectly.

For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

No I'm telling the truth. You are using cherry picked data to make a statement of belief not truth. Again, you have no clear data on how many times a gun was used in self-defense. THAT particular is a "scientific" estimate in your theory while other parts of your theory are using real numbers. You can't have it both ways.

Bottom line: You are using a socialist talking point with made up BS.

[Guisslapp]

No I'm telling the truth. You are using cherry picked data to make a statement of belief not truth. Again, you have no clear data on how many times a gun was used in self-defense. THAT particular is a "scientific" estimate in your theory while other parts of your theory are using real numbers. You can't have it both ways.

Bottom line: You are using a socialist talking point with made up BS.

What is your evidence that is cherry picked? I am using all crime data, not selective.

[JuBru]

What is your evidence that is cherry picked? I am using all crime data, not selective.

It is impossible to "know" any of this with reasonable certainty as federal agencies are banned from collecting data on it and the few private endeavors that have attempted to collect such data have done so in a manner consistent with whatever their agenda is while having access to limited data. It is mostly guess work. It can be nearly accurate or perceptibly so, but it's still guess work nonetheless.

[Guisslapp]

It is impossible to "know" any of this with reasonable certainty as federal agencies are banned from collecting data on it and the few private endeavors that have attempted to collect such data have done so in a manner consistent with whatever their agenda is while having access to limited data. It is mostly guess work. It can be nearly accurate or perceptibly so, but it's still guess work nonetheless.

“Cherry picked” doesn’t mean the same as an incomplete data set, though. The data collected from crimes might not include unreported acts of self defense but that does not mean it is cherry picked. No one has sorted through the crime data to exclude data that doesn’t support the agenda.

There are many problems with assuming the unreported self defense instances would result in different overall conclusion given that the reported cases of self defense do not show better results for the pro gun case, which I have now addressed at least twice in this thread.

[brtransplant]

The right to bear arms (rifle, shotgun, handgun) should not be infringed.

But the right to bear military weapons needs MASSIVE OVERHAUL. No citizen needs a weapon that fires 30+ rounds a minute!

The patriot holding his weapon is holding the latest technology that would have been available to him at that time. It was the same latest technology at the time that was available to any tyrant that would try to impose his will on him. Just like then, an American citizen today has the right to be able to defend himself against tyranny with the same technology that would be brought to bear against him. A citizen today needs a weapon that fires 30+ rounds a minute because that's what he'd be up against if he ever had to defend himself against a tyrannical, out of control, deep state government.

[dawg80]

Truth!

And in fact, many civilians were armed with better weapons than the standing army. The army mostly carried smoothbores that could be fitted with a bayonet. The theory was a battalion of troops, firing smoothbores, was bound to hit something they were aiming at. The average civilian owned a rifled musket, for accuracy for hunting.

[Guisslapp]

Well, you are going to need night vision, armor, an Air Force, navy, tanks and armored vehicles, nuclear weapons, an organized intelligence gathering organization, and the best training in the world to stand a chance against the US armed forces.

[dawg80]

Well, you are going to need night vision, armor, an Air Force, navy, tanks and armored vehicles, nuclear weapons, an organized intelligence gathering organization, and the best training in the world to stand a chance against the US armed forces.

Truth!

That's why I should be able to buy all of that at my local Walmart!

[brtransplant]

Well, you are going to need night vision, armor, an Air Force, navy, tanks and armored vehicles, nuclear weapons, an organized intelligence gathering organization, and the best training in the world to stand a chance against the US armed forces.

What makes you think it will be people that think like me that end up having to face the US military? I think its far more likely that we'll some day see the military defend the Constitution as they're sworn to do. That's when we'll see the deep state utterly destroyed. It'll mean the end of the current US intelligence community and the DOJ. They both became so corrupt under the Obama administration that they'll both have to be completely rebuilt.

[techman05]

Karl is opening a 511 tactical shop in Ruston.

[Guisslapp]

What makes you think it will be people that think like me that end up having to face the US military? I think its far more likely that we'll some day see the military defend the Constitution as they're sworn to do. That's when we'll see the deep state utterly destroyed. It'll mean the end of the current US intelligence community and the DOJ. They both became so corrupt under the Obama administration that they'll both have to be completely rebuilt.

That kind of cuts against your argument that civilians need high powered weapons to fight the government.

But you are clueless about the CIA and the DOJ. You have been baking your brain for too long on conspiracy theory websites.

[DawgyNWindow]

That kind of cuts against your argument that civilians need high powered weapons to fight the government.

But you are clueless about the CIA and the DOJ. You have been baking your brain for too long on conspiracy theory websites.

It was not the WHOLE CIA and DOJ that were part of the deep state. It was the rotten heads of the organizations that made them the deep state. The rank and file are likely just fine.

You'll probably get it one day. You're just resisting because you hate the occupant of the oval office, and you are willing to tear down everything to see him removed from office, even if it means cutting off your nose to spite your face.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

[Guisslapp]

It was not the WHOLE CIA and DOJ that were part of the deep state. It was the rotten heads of the organizations that made them the deep state. The rank and file are likely just fine.

You'll probably get it one day. You're just resisting because you hate the occupant of the oval office, and you are willing to tear down everything to see him removed from office, even if it means cutting off your nose to spite your face.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

I clearly know a lot more about it than you guys.

[PawDawg]

Omniscience is a powerful tool for non-believers. You should go to Vegas.