Pin-up and KaBar's Big Firearms Debate Thread

[Guest imported_Tesseract]

Originally posted by Milton

And by the way, a lot of us are only a few hours and a tank of gas away from Canada or Mexico...

 

What makes you think they'd let you in when you're broke and in need?

 

haha, i'm semikidding but i seriously doubt that americans have a clear picture of just how bad their nations foreign affairs are after the bushebag

[seeking]

Originally posted by villain

I see you're point.

Let me clarify mine. Say that 1% was forced out and took all the damn money with them. So what? We will just make more money.... It's IOU's... who says people have to stop working? Essentially the 1%'s money would become worthless and ours would be good because we are still working and producing goods here.... Then we can print 100$ bills with seekings head on it and it will be all good. :)

 

i know what you're saying, i just dont think you have a realistic idea of the pandemonium that would ensue if all of a sudden our government/police/firemen/social structure were no longer in control.

the first thing that would happen, is people would storm the stores, looting everything they possibly could. guns, ammo and food.

that would take about 3 hours of traffic jams, accidents, brawls, fires and violence. then what? you think joe schmo is going to leave his family, and drive his car down to the local water works so he can do his job? ok, lets say he does...where is he going to get electricity to run the plant from? look what enron did to us in a time of peace, you think con-edison is going to keep making power when all of a sudden no one is paying their bills? hell no. our entire structure would break down within two days. this is of course taking the 'worst case scenario' into consideration, but i think public fear being the way it is, once an outbreak engulfs a major city, the whole country will follow suit, like the domino effect, and since all the major 'necesseties' (water, electricity, communication, food, etc) are all tied together, if power goes down in NY, we've already seen that it's going down for half the east coast, ohio, and michigan as well. tell me honestly that you think people would be working together on an 'iou' system at that point? sure, eventually some sort of system like that would work itself out, but that would not take place for a long time.

as far as the money being worthless...yes, that's true, but you're also forgetting that rich people don't just have money, they have assets, both here and abroad. they own whole countries and all the resources in them. those people would hop in their private planes and take off, never to be heard of again. as far as the gold in fort knocks, i am fairly sure the government already has plans on how to handle our reserves in the event of such a crisis, but even if they didnt, suppose one group of people does manage to get in, blow the building apart and get the gold. well, you now have a couple hundred rich motherfuckers, who you know damn well are not going to share with the rest of us. why not? because they're not sharing now, when it's an issue of a large latte, or a medium latte. they're sure as fuck not sharing when it's a matter of life or death.

 

maybe i'm taking this too far, but i'm just trying to put a realistic spin on kabar's 'red-dawn' fantasy. there will never be a situation where the people are 'working together' in a communistic manner in this country. we have no understanding of that, and infact have been conditioned into exactly the opposit, which is what keeps us where we are.

[fermentor666]

No matter how many guns you have, you're going to run out of bullets at some point.

[seeking]

nope. i got the cheat codes so i have unlimited amo, and so i can see the whole map in the dark (not just the one little circle).

 

 

 

seeks/the legend of zelseekda

[Guest sneak]

Realistically, how likely is the scenario of everyday Americans up rising and over throwing?

[Brownbread?]

Originally posted by seeking

 

maybe i'm taking this too far, but i'm just trying to put a realistic spin on kabar's 'red-dawn' fantasy. there will never be a situation where the people are 'working together' in a communistic manner in this country. we have no understanding of that, and infact have been conditioned into exactly the opposit, which is what keeps us where we are.

 

yea seeking i think you are kinda taking it a little too far. I understand that with the population and our dependency on computers and services there will be chaos at first but eventually there will be control. As corny as this sounds, one thing I can say about Americans is we like order and control.We like to be told what we need and where to get it. Although we hate each other we all like our little routines and if there was a problem we'd work in unison just so we'd get our little usual shit back to the way it was.It happens all the time when there is an accident during rush hour, fire drills, or some sort of natural disaster. Although those are on a smaller scale I think people would react similarly in a larger event. Also alot of people benefit from this country working. I really can't see the wealthy sitting around and watching the entire country go to rumbles. Where else do the rich get richer and richer?I'm not saying everything will be peachy but people will make best of the situation and move on for the sake of normalcy.

[fermentor666]

Originally posted by seeking

nope. i got the cheat codes so i have unlimited amo, and so i can see the whole map in the dark (not just the one little circle).

 

 

Impulse 9; IDKFA

[KaBar2]

Seeking: Feel better now?

 

I am willing to wager that I am one of the very few conservatives with whom you ever exchange ideas. Your little rant doesn't change a thing. And in 1966, the last thing I had any desire to own was a firearm, because I knew so little about human nature and real life that I was convinced that the "doves" would somehow prevail over the evil "hawks."

 

I am no more pleased by the fact that 5% (not 1%) of the population owns or controls 95% of the wealth than you are. I guess I'd like the situation a lot better if I was one of the 5% though.

 

I am inclined to stand with Villain when he says that if the world is going to collapse he'd feel a lot better with an assault rifle. Absolutely, me too. And in my opinion, the world ALREADY is going to shit. It's not some remote possibility, it's happening like a slowly rising tide.

 

I was very concerned about the Y2K thing, it's true. Fortunately, the evil, heartless, corporate world spent 65 BILLION dollars fixing all those defective computer programs and the meltdown turned out to be more-or-less a little fizz here and there. I had several acquaintences who are computer programmers. They were working 12-hour days, seven days a week rewriting code to make it possible for (19) "99" to change to "2000" instead of (19) "00". Several of them quit work in early December 1999 and took their families on "vacations" to newly acquired property in very remote areas of Idaho, Montana and Washington State. Y2K was no hoax, and even the programmers who were rewriting the code weren't 100% convinced it would work flawlessly. I wasn't too worried, because at that point I had an eight month's supply of food and was well prepared (along with several neighbors and friends) to fortify this neighborhood if necessary. We all had a good laugh on New Year's Day, when the computer failures didn't happen. I've still got part of the 110 gallons of gasoline I stored in 55-gallon barrels in my shed. I'm using it up slowly in my truck. We didn't buy much at the grocery store for a long time---didn't need to--we had plenty.

 

On 9/11, my daughter called home all upset, worried about terrorist NBC attacks. "Dad!," she asked, "How many gas masks do we have?!!" I said "Seven, why?" "Oh. No reason. I was just worried about a terrorist attack." "Come home and get yours, you can keep it with you." "I have a gas mask of my own?" "Of course. Well actually, you have two--I bought the small one when you were six, but it doesn't fit any more." "Oh. Okay." "Come home and get your mask. By the way, when was the last time you cleaned your rifle?" "Uh, I'm not sure. It's been a while." "From the looks of it, it's been a long while. Come take care of it." "Okay."

 

I understand that many of you, especially those of you who imagine that the people who hold conservative right-wing beliefs are all a bunch of cretins, disagree with all of the above. You have a right to your opinions. But I have a right to my opinions as well, and to share them (just as you do) with anyone who cares to listen. No, I wouldn't feel more comfortable on a Soldier-of-Fortune board, because there I would be preaching to the choir. But it sure sounds like some people on this board would feel a lot more comfortable if I weren't here.

 

Graffiti writers do not all fit one mould, any more than any other group is homogenous. There are liberal writers, conservative writers, apathetic don't-give-a-fuck writers, and everything in between. The same can be said to be true of tramps, trainhoppers and hobos.

 

My understanding is that Channel Zero is for communications with "no graff content." If my posts don't meet that standard, please explain why not.

 

I do my best to avoid personal, ad hominem attacks. In fact, I try to avoid any sort of negative posts directed at any individual, and to concentrate on the ideas and the information. Once in a while, my emotions get the better of my good sense, but I think I have a good record for not cussing people out and calling anyone any vulgar names. What would be the purpose in that? It's puerile and weak, and I try to avoid it. If I hit the Rossi red one glass too many though, sometimes I do get a little wack.

 

This board seems to be about as free-wheeling an internet forum as I have ever come across. I respect that. If somebody comes on here and posts something like "I went out with this girl, got her drunk and she fucked me and all my buddies!" I don't usually attack the guy and say "You fucking monster! How could you rape some poor chick that was drunk? Don't you have ANY moral values or self respect?" Instead, I try to phrase it in a way that leads the poster towards a more appropriate path, like "Well, I hope you used a rubber so you and all your fucked up friends don't come down with AIDS. And you better fucking hope she can't remember your name, because if her Dad finds out you gang-banged her, you might get fucking killed, genius."

 

Doesn't that seem better, more sensitive, more enlightened? I think so.

 

(I own a shit load of guns so that if all the doped-up, fucked-up, Communist dicksucking shitheels of the world decide to bring their fucked up program to my block, I can turn them all into a pile of stinking, rotting meat. Oh no! What am I saying? Forget that.)

 

I own firearms because it is my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms in defense of myself, my family, and the State. There's nothing wrong with that, it's perfectly honorable, and I make sure that I obey each and every State and Federal law in so doing.

 

And I think everyone, of every race, religion, nationality, culture and ethnic background should exercise all their rights under the Constitution, as amended, including their right to keep and bear arms. Don't you? All my friends do. Don't forget to vote! I won't.

And after I vote, I will come home and reload a few more hundred rounds of ammunition.

[fermentor666]

I don't question your right to have these guns, I question why you think you need so many guns, and what you use them for other than target practice. If you think you need a ton of guns for protection from armageddon or some sort of hostile takeover of our country, that's cool, but I don't agree.

[KaBar2]

Fermentor---as is your RIGHT. I respect that.

[shape1369]

not to be a nit picker, but the there is no gold standard for the dollar anymore seeks. any intro level eco class will tell you that. yes gold has its own standard, but the american dollar is no longer backed by it. the mutability of the dollar is one of the things i find the most interesting about our current economic system

 

if you can show me otherwise please do, but as i understand it we were takin off the gold standard quite a while ago.

 

anywhozille, on topic of social degredation and its possible ways of redemption, this is just my own personal belief, but i feel that as some have said before, america is a young country still...our society seems behind in its social standings because it hasnt had the same amount of time as others. europe and ther regions have had many years for their cultures to develope, weve had not all that long. take many of the countries in africa as example of this idea as well. ever since control was givin back from the european countries, most of the countries have been in a total state of desparity. is it because it is completely backward and incapable of developing? no, it just requires time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

after re reading this and editing a few stupid mistakes, i have decided no more political discussions for me after two in the morning....

sure the process can be speeded along with support from other countries. which can be seen through our borrowing of many governmentally structural ideas from europe and the likes (english common law). not only that but just taking tid bits from the cultures that amassed here in america.

 

i am in now way a supporter of life in america today. im not sayin its great nor am i sayin i particularly want to live here. but i do think that one of the components in this situation that has to be considered is the actual age of the country. america is like a child whos parents divorce when the kid is about five. they are forced to grow up quickly. which we have done and with quite a bit of sucess, but just like that child there is still much learning and maturing to be done.

[T.T Boy]

who would the militia kill if they were trying to take over? police men? the army? firemen? doctors? any politician? even if they were in charge of the dog catching department? i seriously wonder, like there isnt some captain of the state in every state waiting to be killed and if he does, the militia wins. someone let me know.

 

 

alot of north americans, myself included, (im not that enlightened) freak out a little when we get into less restrictive countries, kids way too stoned in holland, where the dutch seem to not get totally wasted, kids in italy drinking wayyy too much in the streets and going into clubs cause they can, where as italians dont seem to really et al that drunk. im sure any european can see this in north americans. we almost dont know how to handle ourselves when there are no rules, or less rules than at home, especially on things that are so forbidden to us, smoking, clubbing, drinking (this alot less to canadians i think, we get a ton of yanks in bc coming to drink), drug use etc.

 

guns are bad, well, not bad, but useless to civilians.

[seeking]

kabar,

my point was that you don't listen. you agree with villian, you'd rather have an assault rifle? well, had you read what i said, you'd know that i agreed with him as well, which is why i ALSO own an assault rifle (as well as handguns and a tactical shotgun). i've never once advocated the outright banning of guns in america, and infact speak out against it. i dont think it's realistic. but you don't bother to acknowledge the parts that don't aid your argument. you don't come here to discuss, you come here to lord over us with your sage wisdom, and have never once (that i've seen) conceeded to the idea that you might just possibly be wrong about something, or even that someone has a valid backing for their [opposing] opinion. you don't agree to disagree, you agree to thinking we have no idea what we're talking about. the fact that you've refused to comment on my take on the problem of guns, just further proves that to me. you're not trying to have a 'discussion' about guns. that would mean going two ways. you're trying to chair a lecture.

 

i'm not asking you to leave, i'm just questioning why you're here, wasting our time and your own with 7000 word essays that only go one way. you're like a tv evangelist in hot topic (cheesy punk rock store in the mall). you have text book arguments for your ideas and ignore anything and everything that doesnt come with some pre packaged rebuttle. i've seen it happen time and time again. no matter how logical or factual someone is, you completely ignore reality in order to hold on to your outdated ideology. you're a smart guy, who has a wealth of experiences and probably a whole lot to offer the world and to the youth, but you also need to remember that you don't know everything and that times change. fixing a 67 ford tempest is not the same as fixing a 2003 focus. you never seem to take that into account. you seem to come to one conclusion and hold onto it for dear life. none of the rest of us that get into 'serious' discussions on here do that, we're all open to the idea of expansion. i think your input would be a whole lot more well received if you'd follow suit.

 

anyway, back to the topic at hand. the one you insisted was not done at the sound of my bell. please tell me how your guns are going to win the freedom of the american people. tell me how giving a gun to every man woman and child would realisticly insure our survival. don't hide behind some bullshit minuteman rhetoric from 1876, or use your friends for your rational. your friends constitute about .00000001% of the countries population. take a good look at reality and then tell me (preferably in less than 6 pages) how your guns are going to save us, taking into account human nature, taking into account our weaknesses as a society, taking into account the nature of our existence. look at life in america, in 2004, and tell me how your guns are going to save us from ourselves. i'm not talking about simple hand guns and potential rape scenarios, that's too easy. you say we need to arm ourselves as protection from our government. so paint for me a portrait of an american revolution, where we go to 'war' with the government to take our country back. include all races, classes and ages. make me see how it would be any different than what i've described. (and again, do it as simply as possible. i'm a pretty perceptive guy, i don't need every detail spelled out).

[seeking]

shape,

there may not be a dollar to troy-pound conversation rate, but we still maintain a HUGE supply of gold here in the states. gold will always be valuable all over the world. barring the complete eradication of our country, the US dollar will always have some value as well.

or maybe i'm wrong. i've never actually had an economics class....or a geography class...or math beyond pre algebra, 12 years ago. ha.

i can tell you all about photography and skateboarding though.

 

 

seeks/just kidding about the skateboarding.

[shape1369]

seeks,

 

yeah, basically the actual value of a dollar is now based on the faith of the country. anywho, i do agree that if some cataclismic event were to occur as yall were discussing, the dollar would still hold value for the simple fact that its american... even if our money ends up having no value in other countries after such event, it would still retain some value in america itself merely because the layperson wouldnt know better than to know that it wouldnt... the value of the dollar is just as much based on the perception of its strength as its actual strength.

 

i was thinkin bout somethin last night as i fall asleep, it had somethin with another way to measure inflation....damnit it was cool too....i think it was something like takin the percieved value of the dollar comparative to its actual value...and i forgot how i figured out how to measure the two, but i did. it was one of those three in the mornin epiphanies right as ur falling asleep. but u cant remember the next morning.

 

one of the things i love bout these boards is that u can be taken seriously regardless of age. i just graduated highschool and am seventeen. but dont matter on here. just wanted to say thanks for the respect and all..

[seeking]

yeah, i knew that our dollars worth was pretty arbitrary. when so much of our economy is tied up in other, more fragile countries, stocks, futures and what not, it would be impossible to be more concrete. there's just too much fluctuation in the world to keep a gold deblume for each coinciding dollar bill. and actually, after we got into that, and after villians comments about the dollar being worthless, i started thinking about how our collapse would effect those with money. i kind of blindly assumed they would be fine because they have offshore assets and what not, but if we go down, it's going to be a huge domino effect across the whole world. our downfall would devestate the livelyhood of the entire 'civilized' world. most of europe would recover alright i think, but china, mexico, india, taiwan, etc? dudes would be in t-t-t-t-trouble. that then lead me to realize how important it is to fix our current system, and detrimental to the world it would be, if people like kabar actually somehow seized control of our country. that would arguably be worse for the world than the current system.

 

shape,

intelligence isn't about age, its about understanding. if you know you what your talking about, and have a desire to learn, people will usually always respect your input. welcome.

[Milton]

The dollar is still backed by gold. The difference is that it became a fluctuating currency under Carter I think it was. This means that its value goes up and down comparative to other currencies. It's not backed by a specific gold standard anymore..

[oneeightyone]

seeks is my new hero

 

on another note, im actually getting into politics bit by bit, im meeting people that might give me a push so to say if i ever want to get into it. so then i can control it all, and make laws to keep guns away from crazy ass people like our friendly neighborhood nut kabar.

[seeking]

actually, i obviously don't agree with kabar on much of this stuff, but i would hardly think of him as 'unsafe' with guns. he's probably 1000x's less likely to shoot an innocent person by accident than your average gun owner, because he's alot more comfortable with them. anyone that's dealt with people with guns knows that the more experience you have with them, the safer you are. it's like with driving.

also, i dont think guns should be banned in america. i think it's an unrealistic response to very realistic problem. i think fully automatic weapons should be banned, but as for handguns and shotguns, at this point i think the only thing that will stop violent crime is to create a less violent society, not to regulate guns.

i'm glad your getting involved with politics. someday i'd love to run for something but i've done way too much dirt for that to be possible. my new goal is to affect policy by exposing reality.

[KaBar2]

Seeking

 

It seems to me that you are just as guilty as I am of holding forth on a particular set of ideas and perceptions of the world and refusing to budge. And since you own an assault rifle and a tactical shotgun, etc. then you must have a reason for doing so. Your particular reason for so doing is protected by the Second Amendment, just as is my own ownership of weapons is protected.

 

As I stated before, I no longer hunt. I do not need the meat, and it's too much hassle, although I enjoyed hunting when I did hunt. I am opposed to anti-hunting groups and their wacky ideas, and I reserve the right to hunt in the future, should I ever decide to do so.

 

Ownership of firearms in the U.S. is not about hunting. It's not about sport, at all. It is about the right of the people to be armed, because the people (ALL THE PEOPLE, by law--at least all the able-bodied male people between 17 and 45) constitute "the militia." If you look up the word militia in the dictionary, rather than depending upon some leftist journalist's perversion of the word, you will see what I mean.

 

There is no such thing as "a militia", meaning a small group of people who form a paramilitary group and arm and train themselves. The use of the word like that is a form of Orwellian "newspeak." Like naming the secret police headquarters "the Ministry of Truth." At first, everybody is a little put off by it, but pretty soon the change in concept is ubiquitous and people lose the concept (the true concept) of the original meaning of the word "militia." "Militia" become a buzzword for something bad, and people wholeheartedly embrace the idea that somehow the "defense of the Nation" is the perogative of "professionals." (Don't try this at home, kids. Leave it to "the professionals.")

 

If you read what was written by the Founders of the country, you will see that their worse fears have come true. They were very much against the creation of a "select militia" (like the National Guard) which was only open to certain people and only controlled by certain politicians. They were advocates of the Swiss militia system, in which virtually EVERY SINGLE MALE was required to participate, given a rank and assigned membership to a company of militiamen. This was known, in the parlance of that time, as a "Well-regulated" (i.e. "well-organized and trained") militia. "Well-regulated" does NOT equate with "controlled by the Government." Plainly, without question, the intent and purpose oif a "well-regulated militia" is to ARM THE POPULATION AS A COUNTERBALANCE TO A STANDING ARMY. The U.S. fought every war from the Revolution until WWI using volunteer state militias. Teddy Roosevelt recruited the Rough Riders from the bar of a well-known hotel in San Antonio, mainly from Texas cowboys, to fight in the Spanish-American War. (Too bad it was such a colonialist war.)

 

The period of American history right after the turn of the century was a horrible time for American liberty. The most powerful and wealthy men in the country, as well as in other countries, were conspiring to seize control of American banking, to pass "Jim Crow" legislation, to break the back of the growing American labor movement, and, among other things, to do away with the long-standing American "militia system." In 1913, the same year that they forced the law through establishing the Federal Reserve System (a central banking scheme that made them BILLIONS of dollars, and has essentially turned us all into slaves of that infamous 5% of the population that controls the wealth) they also passed the Dick Act (boy, well named) that disbanded the state militias, and replaced them with a FEDERALLY-CONTROLLED select militia named the "National Guard." This law permits the President to sieze control of a Governor's state military forces anytime he chooses to declare an emergency.

 

This was an act worthy of a Lenin, a Stalin, or a Hitler. Concentration of Power at the Very Top.

 

I suppose anyone can look at a historical event and interpret it any way one chooses, but I'll bet that 99% of the young people on this board had never heard of the Dick Act until I wrote about it on here. WHY NOT? It was a very, very profound change in the way our country defended itself, and the result has been that the average person in society no longer thinks he or she has any stake in performing National Defense, which is, I think, exactly the result the writers of the Dick Act hoped for. Opponents of the militia system say that it was ineffective and the troops were poorly trained (probably true, at that time.) They say that the National Guard and the militia system are "essentially the same." (Oh, really? Then why not leave the National Guard troops completely under the authority of a state's Governor and legislature?) They say that the National Guard will be used only in an emergency. The term "citizen soldier" is bandied about, and the idea put forth that the National Guardsmen would only be called to duty when absolutely necessary. I think the invasion of Iraq has raised a lot of people's eyebrows on that idea. I bet that they are going to have a very difficult time recruiting to the National Guard for quite a while.

 

The U.S. armed forced are supposedly "stretched thin" by the deployment of 150,000 troops to Iraq. Meanwhile THIRTY-ONE MILLION American deer hunters are available to defend the country, because they are, BY LAW, members of the militia, according to the United States Code, Title 10, Section 311, 312, 313, etc. (Look it up, it's online,) not to mention the other 70 million American gun owners. I fail to see any reason that Joe Deerhunter is supposedly a big old slob, untrustworthy and with suspect loyalties when he's in the Texas Constitutional Militia, and then becomes Lance Corporal Perfect after he joins the Marines. We sent four kids to the Army infantry and Marine Corps infantry out of our militia group. They were ALL very successful, well-trained, well-disciplined and in excellent physical shape before they ever arrived at Boot Camp. Believe me, the Marines had very little work to do on our kids, they were already combat ready. If anything, their military service made them LESS ready, not more, because the Army (especially) with it's sloppy discipline and poor morale errodes the average adolescent's self esteem and determination to do a good job.

 

One of the liberal media's greatest coups has been to cast the militia in the role of subversive, when in fact it is the GOVERNMENT ITSELF that has been subverting American liberty.

 

We have a tendency in the U.S. to have an attention span that is about a half hour long. TV, I think, is the culprit. We also have a very short historical memory. Many of the kids on this board were only two or three years old when Ruby Ridge and the Waco Massacre occurred. It is not part of their memory or conciousness. The OKC Bombing occurred when they were five or six. Ancient history.

 

This coming Presidential election is very important. Whoever wins will appoint four (or more) Supreme Court justices, who are members of the Supreme Court for life. Elect a young enough justice and the future course of the country can be influenced for a generation.

 

We are standing on the eve of a Turning Point In History. WAKE THE FUCK UP. Participate! Fight to maintain the essential liberties we have all enjoyed, because if we do not defend them, we will lose them. The wealthy, powerful, "Establishment" people ("families," I should say) are once again trying to dominate control of our collective future.

[Brownbread?]

Seeking i misinterpreted what you were saying. from rereading the thread i realized that you were talking about a slighty different scenerio than what I was commenting on.