[lit-ideas] Re: Feeling Safe isn't safe
- From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 09:59:47 -0700
Isn't it the likes of the Bush government that the FF were warning against?
And how did widespread gun ownership stop the Bush administration? It didn't,
not at all.
The upcoming microchip ID cards, the ID checks at airports, the surveillance of all
transactions (bank activity, credit cards, etc.), all email, all fax, all telephone... the
rampant domestic spying by the FBI, how did gun ownership and the second admendment prevent
that? Not at all.
The second amendment issue is another fake issue. The real goal is for handgun companies to
sell handguns. "Self-defense", "Second amendment", "Prevent tyranny", etc. are just
marketing slogans to create gullible buyers.
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ursula Stange" <Ursula@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 10:50 AM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Feeling Safe isn't safe
Isn't it the likes of the Bush government that the FF were warning against? So it's
quite interesting that it's overwhelmingly the people who support gun ownership --on the
basis of protecting against tyranny--
who are supporting the tyrannical government.
Was it Jefferson who warned that a democracy cannot work without an educated
populace?
Ursula (just back from Mexico, so not caught up on this or any other thread)
Paul Stone wrote:
Lawrence:
Since gun control advocates have attempted to institute
legislation favoring their position, this matter has been hotly
debated in congress from time to time, but the fact that the
founding fathers, the originators of the Second Amendment meant a
certain thing by it weighs heavily against gun control and gun
control makes little headway. The above is an analysis from a
congressional subcommittee on gun control. It is especially
interesting because in it one can find a history of the thinking
that led up to the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment seems to be as outdated and as relevant as the "rules" in The Bible
against eating certain things or menstruating women attending church. The liklihood that
the reason that you need a gun is to form an armed militia against a tyrannical
government is very low. It's interesting that the answer to "why do you have a gun?" and
"why should you be allowed to have a gun?" are very different. The answer to the first is
so you can shoot people if they "get too close" or try to take your stuff. The answer to
the second is because your fore-fathers lived in a renegade society where you needed to
be able to form militias against certain other factions... and now you extend it to the
ludicrous argument: so you can shoot _government_ people if they try to take your stuff.
paul
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
