This is basically my view as well. 2A doesn’t account for the advance of guns (yes, I realize this is a controversial opinion and some thing that it does), and I don’t think the writers foresaw what modern “defenses” would be. The right to bear arms, ostensibly for defense has become the right to own guns for reasons beyond defense. Not really sure how owning a gun to shoot at the range applies, but we’re not turning this boat around.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
Politics And Current Events
Politics And Current Events
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Doesn't Pennsylvania have 17 more electoral votes than Wyoming?Oh. I don’t have a right to vote. I have the right to cast a partial vote while Wyomingers and others get extra votes. Y’all are cool with that one, of course.Democratic voting has only been around since the 19th Amendment.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
So I guess that "right" is fundamentally absurd as well.
Seems like a bit unfair.
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
This exact same argument can be applied to the 1st Amendment.This is basically my view as well. 2A doesn’t account for the advance of guns (yes, I realize this is a controversial opinion and some thing that it does), and I don’t think the writers foresaw what modern “defenses” would be. The right to bear arms, ostensibly for defense has become the right to own guns for reasons beyond defense. Not really sure how owning a gun to shoot at the range applies, but we’re not turning this boat around.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
How does the internet square with an inkpen and paper world?
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Not the Onion
Politics And Current Events
"The founding fathers didn't know guns would become what they have" does not equal "the founding fathers didn't know free speech would include computers"This exact same argument can be applied to the 1st Amendment.This is basically my view as well. 2A doesn’t account for the advance of guns (yes, I realize this is a controversial opinion and some thing that it does), and I don’t think the writers foresaw what modern “defenses” would be. The right to bear arms, ostensibly for defense has become the right to own guns for reasons beyond defense. Not really sure how owning a gun to shoot at the range applies, but we’re not turning this boat around.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
How does the internet square with an inkpen and paper world?
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
How does that make sense?"The founding fathers didn't know guns would become what they have" does not equal "the founding fathers didn't know free speech would include computers"This exact same argument can be applied to the 1st Amendment.This is basically my view as well. 2A doesn’t account for the advance of guns (yes, I realize this is a controversial opinion and some thing that it does), and I don’t think the writers foresaw what modern “defenses” would be. The right to bear arms, ostensibly for defense has become the right to own guns for reasons beyond defense. Not really sure how owning a gun to shoot at the range applies, but we’re not turning this boat around.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
How does the internet square with an inkpen and paper world?
They couldn't imagine semi-automatic firearms with scary pistol grips and also couldn't imagine free speech including computers.
In both cases they are instruments of the underlying principle that have evolved since 1789.
Politics And Current Events
You can’t kill a person with words, no matter the form; you can with guns. One advancement makes it easier to communicate and the other makes it easier to inflict harm.This exact same argument can be applied to the 1st Amendment.This is basically my view as well. 2A doesn’t account for the advance of guns (yes, I realize this is a controversial opinion and some thing that it does), and I don’t think the writers foresaw what modern “defenses” would be. The right to bear arms, ostensibly for defense has become the right to own guns for reasons beyond defense. Not really sure how owning a gun to shoot at the range applies, but we’re not turning this boat around.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
How does the internet square with an inkpen and paper world?
Politics And Current Events
Multi-shot guns existed at the time, such as "pepperbox" firearms, the 22-shot Girandoni air rifle, the Kalthoff repeater, and the Belton flintlock. There were guns with multiple barrels, guns with multiple loads in the same barrel that were fired in sequence, and guns with systems for rapidly loading ball and powder. It was the case that it took the invention and adoption of the percussion cap to make more reliable multi-shot firearms, but they were certainly around, and the percussion cap was well on the market by the 1820s—hardly an extraordinary amount of time after the passage of the Bill of Rights.
People during the founding period owned arms that were state-of-the-art at the time and eagerly adopted anything newer and better.
People during the founding period owned arms that were state-of-the-art at the time and eagerly adopted anything newer and better.
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Think about all the suicides that come from online bullying, just as an example.You can’t kill a person with words, no matter the form; you can with guns. One advancement makes it easier to communicate and the other makes it easier to inflict harm.This exact same argument can be applied to the 1st Amendment.This is basically my view as well. 2A doesn’t account for the advance of guns (yes, I realize this is a controversial opinion and some thing that it does), and I don’t think the writers foresaw what modern “defenses” would be. The right to bear arms, ostensibly for defense has become the right to own guns for reasons beyond defense. Not really sure how owning a gun to shoot at the range applies, but we’re not turning this boat around.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
How does the internet square with an inkpen and paper world?
Politics And Current Events
What makes someone “secure” is a subjective term, which is why there is so much debate about this. “Eagerly adopting” whatever new technology of firearms comes around doesn’t necessarily equate to being secure.
Politics And Current Events
How many of those suicides are by gun?Think about all the suicides that come from online bullying, just as an example.You can’t kill a person with words, no matter the form; you can with guns. One advancement makes it easier to communicate and the other makes it easier to inflict harm.This exact same argument can be applied to the 1st Amendment.This is basically my view as well. 2A doesn’t account for the advance of guns (yes, I realize this is a controversial opinion and some thing that it does), and I don’t think the writers foresaw what modern “defenses” would be. The right to bear arms, ostensibly for defense has become the right to own guns for reasons beyond defense. Not really sure how owning a gun to shoot at the range applies, but we’re not turning this boat around.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
How does the internet square with an inkpen and paper world?
Yes, easier communication can have negative consequences, but the purpose of words isn’t to kill. Guns were made for the purpose of killing things. That is the intent of that specific machine. The advances in guns are meant to make that intent easier.
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
-
- Posts: 19041
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:37 pm
- Location: people notice my car when its shined up
Politics And Current Events
Even for a Friday night this is incredibly low effort. I can say why, but you already know it’s a dumb comeback.Doesn't Pennsylvania have 17 more electoral votes than Wyoming?Oh. I don’t have a right to vote. I have the right to cast a partial vote while Wyomingers and others get extra votes. Y’all are cool with that one, of course.Democratic voting has only been around since the 19th Amendment.I think human rights have existed for a few hundred thousand years, and every single gun is an example of modern technology- relatively speaking. Which makes their status as a “right” to be fundamentally absurd. IMO.
So I guess that "right" is fundamentally absurd as well.
Seems like a bit unfair.
Right to bear arms is unrelated to the technology that it is now tethered to. I understand the point. It’s abstractly about defense. Good. Great. But you can’t own several instruments of defense for a variety of reasons, so what’s one or two more? Where is the protest over you not possessing an armed drone to scout out your property?
To your earlier post, voting is a construct. Elections are a construct. Guns are a construct. There’s no such thing as a fundamental right to a construct. So all of these things deserve an honest, fluid, good faith assessment that’s repeated constantly as norms evolve.
Politics And Current Events
So there's a White Lives Matter rally scheduled for Sunday in Huntingdon Beach. That should be fun.
-
- Posts: 15414
- Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 3:13 pm
- Location: dodint is a millennial
Politics And Current Events
At least the destruction level will be less than a BLM "rally" would beSo there's a White Lives Matter rally scheduled for Sunday in Huntingdon Beach. That should be fun.
-
- Posts: 60900
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
- Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.
Politics And Current Events
‘Black people cause more damage’ is what he’s getting at.
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Not sure if you remember the BLM riots but those were mostly white people as well.‘Black people cause more damage’ is what he’s getting at.
Though they did cause over a billion dollars in property damage so the fainting goats reacting to LBL will need to deal with that.
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Speaking about hating black people...
-
- Posts: 8984
- Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 9:02 am
Politics And Current Events
What net positive is there to even remotely defend LBLs comment?Not sure if you remember the BLM riots but those were mostly white people as well.‘Black people cause more damage’ is what he’s getting at.
Though they did cause over a billion dollars in property damage so the fainting goats reacting to LBL will need to deal with that.
Politics And Current Events
Own the libs brah
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Because I'm a person who understands that what LBL posted is factually accurate given what actually happened in real life.What net positive is there to even remotely defend LBLs comment?Not sure if you remember the BLM riots but those were mostly white people as well.‘Black people cause more damage’ is what he’s getting at.
Though they did cause over a billion dollars in property damage so the fainting goats reacting to LBL will need to deal with that.
Are you arguing that the BLM protests over the summer did not cause massive amounts of property damage and led to over a dozen deaths?
Pointing that out isn't racist.
-
- Posts: 19041
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:37 pm
- Location: people notice my car when its shined up
Politics And Current Events
The equivalent protest for this crew is the group of people who broke into the Capitol and tried to murder their political opponents.
That one is worse. Tell me more about BLM.
That one is worse. Tell me more about BLM.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Lemon Berry Lobster, the wicked child and 75 guests