A Rationalization
Posted: 3 August 2012 Filed under: Observations, Society | Tags: Cartoon, Gun Rights, Postaday 2012 13 Comments »
In Saner Thought
"It is the duty of every man, as far as his ability extends, to detect and expose delusion and error"..Thomas Paine
%d bloggers like this:
Yep, let’s arm everyone, everywhere and when another nut ball opens up we can obliterate him and worry about “collateral damage” later.
Yep……that is indisputable logic…..LOL
Lobtero,,
For someone who revels in the philosophy of John Locke, Thomas Paine, and other classical liberals, you don’t seem to take too much stock into their ideals. Our Founders would appreciate the need of citizens to have weapons that can match the power of government, lest that government becomes oppressive.
” Our Founders would appreciate the need of citizens to have weapons that can match the power of government, lest that government becomes oppressive.”
What do you base this on Terrance? And should you consider that if this is true, are you sure that the founding fathers would ever imagine the god-awful fire power that government militaries now possess? Would they really be in favor of private citizens owning hi-tech surface to air missals or an M1 Abrams Main Battle tank, or BOTH?
For God sakes it is a cartoon…..And to say what you just said is wrong….I can believe in everything they say and write without jumping on the “I MUST own as many guns as possible” bandwagon…….and on a side note…..do you think our government is oppressive? The idiot in Colorado is a nut job….and how many more of these whackos are waiting in the wings?
I am sorry that I tried to illustrate a bit of irony…..do not worry….I realized what you were saying about Locke and I do not attack on petty shit like that……
Lobotero,
For someone supposedly influenced by classical libertarians, it’s an odd cartoon (political statement) to depict (to make).
I never suggested you should own guns. However, if you’re as influenced by those philosophers as you say you are, you’d respect the rights of others to own “as many guns as possible.”
Do I think our government is oppressive? Not yet. And why would you ask that question? Whether our government is currently oppressive or not has no bearing on the need of citizens to protect themselves, since governments give little warning before they become oppressive. Should I start calling you Neville?
Just a side-note: I didn’t mean to suggest that John Locke was one of our Founders. That was poorly worded. My bad. But the point still stands, since Locke influenced our Founders greatly, and the writings of our Founders clearly illustrate their opinion on weapons.
[...] In Response To A Rationalization [...]
Larry,
It’s simple common sense to any who’ve bothered to read their writings. To even suggest that our Founders wouldn’t appreciate the need of citizens to properly defend themselves from oppressive government is simply ludicrous, and scandalously asinine to boot.
With that being said, weapons of mass destruction are an entirely different type of arms that the Second Amendment clearly doesn’t cover. Citizens need to be able to defend themselves, not take over continents.
I wasn’t questioning the right to bear arms Terrance. I was merely responding to your excessive comment that said the founding fathers would appreciate its citizens today for having weapons that can match the power of government. Our government has levels of weaponry that were not even imaginable 235 years ago and sure as hell wouldn’t rest on a gun rack over the fireplace.
So tell me which literature you have been reading that validates such a claim. Did Madison talk somewhere in the Federalist papers about a citizen’s right to own canons? Everything I have read always spoke about rifles, and never the amounts that would replicate a military arsenal then or now.
Larry,
M4A1′s, M16′s, and AK47′s are rifles, Larry. But you don’t support those being legal, now do you? And you know I wasn’t talking about tanks or nuclear missiles, so why don’t you quit extrapolating my words and respond accordingly?
In this century, if citizens are trying to ward off oppressive regimes with Davy Crocket muskets, they might as well put their head between their legs and kiss their asses goodbye. It makes no sense that our Founders would see today’s technology, suggest its too much for the citizenry to have, and take a 180 by leaving the people all but impotent. It makes zero sense.
You can draw logic from my claim, but your wild accusation (implication) about the Founder’s opinion is utterly unsupportable, and quite Michael Moore-sque if you don’t mind my saying.
Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first, a right to life, secondly to liberty, thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can. ~ Samuel Adams
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops. ~ Noah Webster
“You can draw logic from my claim, but your wild accusation (implication) about the Founder’s opinion is utterly unsupportable, and quite Michael Moore-sque if you don’t mind my saying.”
There you go again. Trying to win me over with your delicate sense of wit and charm.
Try taking a couple of antacids for all that bile stored up in your crawl my friend.
I’m sorry, Larry, but I call a spade a spade. Your argument is similar to one I’ve heard Michael Moore make on Piers Morgan.
It’s kind of hard to get worked up when you know you’re right, so I don’t require antacids.