Why do people want guns?
- Thread starter Chikombo
- Start date
UnderTheRedHood
Guest
Obito the supreme jin
Active member
America doesn't need to go down the China route. China practically has cameras set up everywhere in streets for surveillance.
Guns are a legalized individual's right, it i used for self defense. It gives a people a sense of empowerment while powerless. If you took guns away, the more rapes/crimes are likely to happen especially since America is not communistic. It might have communistic tendencies , but people's private right are still top priority.
Guns are needed in this world, people just have to learn how to control their emotions.
Guns are a legalized individual's right, it i used for self defense. It gives a people a sense of empowerment while powerless. If you took guns away, the more rapes/crimes are likely to happen especially since America is not communistic. It might have communistic tendencies , but people's private right are still top priority.
Guns are needed in this world, people just have to learn how to control their emotions.
Obito the supreme jin
Active member
But one leads to another. It is a cause and effect relationship. People need to control their emotions to weild guns.
From a personal standpoint - sure. The process of properly using a firearm is far easier to teach one's self than the process for controlling their own emotions.
From a social and economic standpoint, neither can be controlled, and of the two - weapons are far harder to control. For starters, simple economics states that where there is a demand, there will be those willing to supply that demand for a price. Drugs are illegal, and there are record overdoses and all one has to do is look beneath the vernier of society to find a supplier. Similar with firearms, although the purposes for one illegally seeking a firearm are typically not for personal defense, and as such, constrained to a far smaller portion of the population intent on causing harm to others.
Then, you have people like myself, who do not need to be supplied with weapons, as we can simply manufacture surface to surface missiles, directed energy weapons, firearms of all varieties, or can just abduct you by strong-arm force and tie you to a chair and 'test' you by having a button that gives you an orgasm and a button that gives you food/water. After you die, repeatedly mashing the orgasm button, we'll just dissolve your body and it will be like you just left home one day and never came back.
We get along with society because it's more worth the effort to do so. In the event it ever becomes more worthwhile to push a button and wipe out a few thousand people while deploying giant metal spiders that rip people to shreds and fuel themselves on the glucose in their blood - then there will be almost no warning. It will just happen, and you will wonder why your god has forsaken you.
I jest. Glucose isn't a sufficient fuel source for such a contraption. They would drink it just for the terror effect.
Because it's our right as Americans? Why do you need to speak freely? Why do minorities have to be treated fairly in society? Why does everyone have the right to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Because we fucking can.
WalksInShadows
Active member
all you have to do is look at the prison system and see less guns don't arbitrarily equate to being more safe. The inmates don't even have easy access to guns, and the lvl of violence is just as tangible. It all depends on how comfortable you are with your surroundings at any given moment.
HowDidIGetPrem
Active member
Awards
Is it a right that should stick around is the followup question though. You can bundle it with more deserving ones all you want, but it's still a question that stands alone.
The problem is "what is a right?"
In America, the concept of a right is not quite the same as what it is in other nations. A right is not seen as a privilege by a government, it is seen as a sort of immutable law of society. The reason why the government of the U.S. shall make no law regarding the exercise of free speech is not because a bunch of men in wigs 200+ years ago decided it would be a cool thing to give people, but because a society must be allowed to freely express ideas or it will eventually revolt against its government. A government isn't forbidden from hacking your head off from saying "I like my little pony" because it's mean, but because a government which does such things is going to face revolt and be replaced.
Likewise, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. This is, again, not because this is a cool little freedom thing to give to people - it's because the ONLY reason a government has to restrict armaments is in order to solidify its control over the population and render their consent to be governed null and void. It is not there so much as a real control against government, but as a canary in the coal mine. When the second amendment is abolished, the whole of the U.S. becomes a free-fire zone and the civilian population is at war with the politicians and any willing to enforce such policies.
This is, precisely, what is unfolding in Europe, currently. "Refugees" swamp a society and subjugate it to a will that is not of the people as police cover up crimes by 'refugees' and politicians arrest people for thought crimes. The governments of Europe do not serve the interests of the people they govern in the slightest. It has not evolved one step above the feudal system, which is still very much present.
To be fair, America has its own issues it is dealing with and an open, armed revolt is a can of worms of last resort; but we still have that option. Europe's population is literally being replaced. Those who do not want to go along with the new order are literally being replaced by imported sources of labor and skills while their own schooling and society is scuttled from within. Men are raised to be women and women raised to be men - where not ritualistically abused into being breed stock for the invaders.
It is unconscionable, to me, that people would trust the government to wield exclusive authority over arms and armament above their own citizenry. Citizens can be trusted to vote people into office, yet they can't be trusted to wield basic small arms while the officials elected by them wield nuclear arsenals. If people can't be trusted to have firearms, then they sure as hell can't be trusted to vote for their own leaders. Of course, who counts the votes, anyway?
They released the 64-bit processing expansion a while ago. Comes with expanded ram and some additional ARM cores to use. Send me your addy and I can send you one with a letter explaining the situation to whomever's electronics project you've decided to haunt.