Batman Massacre Colorado

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by Shock Value

...I don't believe the American military would kill it's own people. Even if they were instructed to do so....

[verve92]

Originally Posted by Shock Value

And for housing? it was WAY overblown... A bubble market, like the tech industry was in the 90's... I mean how can a young couple in their 20's expect to pay $3000,000 for a house that's only worth $1000,000 in reality?

Overblown how?
Why is most people I know with mutual funds money disappeared as has their pensions and retirement and laying off teachers and cops in the areas that need them? One side is more culpable than the other.
A young couple cannot get a house as easily. You are 100% correct. You need disposable income to maintain one. What happens if you need a new roof or you hot water heater blows?
I do respect you, but you need to do more reading.
The President was left with a mess he did not create and I admit he is not great negotiator. And if you think race is not an issue with him, you are not paying attention.
There are entire websites full of Fox News bollocks that have been proven dead wrong. Donald Trump is still on the news questioning his Americanism.
Funny how I talk to people and know where they get their info from. Only one place spews hate and misinformation like Fox news. They are treasonist. They have no solutions except whta has not worked by giving billionaires and corporations tax breaks for sending jobs overseas.
I've been hearing this tax BS for 11 years and Obama still allowed the Bush tax cuts to the "Job Creators" and no jobs have been created and wages have fallen while COL has gone up 23% in the last 15 years.
Its OVER!

[Shock Value]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

Go on and laugh, I just don't believe it. That they would kill their own parents, brothers and sisters...

You're talking Civil War again... I don't believe it will ever come to that again. But if it does, I'm armed and ready.

The President was left with a mess he did not create and I admit he is not great negotiator. And if you think race is not an issue with him, you are not paying attention.

A lot of the mess was Clinton's leftover bad policies. Especially on housing.

[joelpatterson]

No. They'll be ordered to kill strangers, and do it in a heartbeat.

[JoRillo]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

No. They'll be ordered to kill strangers, and do it in a heartbeat.

I don't disagree with you in the thought that their would be military who would attack their own country (after being mind fk'd into believing they are the enemy), but I can guarantee if it came down to a citizen vs government war, we would have at LEAST 50% of the military on our side.

[verve92]

Originally Posted by JoRillo

I don't disagree with you in the thought that their would be military who would attack their own country (after being mind fk'd into believing they are the enemy), but I can guarantee if it came down to a citizen vs government war, we would have at LEAST 50% of the military on our side.

I say more like 75% because the military treats their people so wonderfully (sarcasm)
It will come to civil war if its not fixed and this is why the right is tooling up.
They will lose like they did in the real civil war as blacks and Hispanics are on the left and in bigger numbers by then and is why the right is trying to suppress the vote.
By the time this happens I will be back with my folx in Tornoto or move to Sweden where I have relatives.
If I could sell my house I'd be there now. I'd have to take one test and will be an RPh there.

[Shock Value]

Originally Posted by verve92

I say more like 75% because the military treats their people so wonderfully (sarcasm)
It will come to civil war if its not fixed and this is why the right is tooling up.
They will lose like they did in the real civil war as blacks and Hispanics are on the left and in bigger numbers by then and is why the right is trying to suppress the vote.
By the time this happens I will be back with my folx in Tornoto or move to Sweden where I have relatives.
If I could sell my house I'd be there now. I'd have to take one test and will be an RPh there.

You're crazy, LOL... We as a nation are reasonable people and I don't see a Civil War on the horizon.

[Dean Roddey]

Originally Posted by Shock Value

You're wrong. I don't believe the American military would kill it's own people. Even if they were instructed to do so.

I never said it was likely to happen. I was just addressing your implying I was dumb because I failed to recognize that guys with hunting guns were a big part of the Revolutionary War, but then you immediately changed the goal again of it never happening or if it did that no one would cooperate, which are completely different things.

I was just pointing out that that's not relevant anymore, and that individuals owning weapons has zip to do with preventing military takeover of the country or with protecting the country against foreign invasion. It wouldn't be a factor at all. But, people in this thread were using them as reasons why guns are protected by the Constitution.

So the argument for protecting their use specially is a use for which they never come into play, and haven't for well over a hundred years. No one protecting this country is using his own weapons. And, with modern military technology what it is, they won't come into play ever again in any meaningful way.

Clearly the Constitution does not protect their ownership for any other reason. It's trivially obvious from reading the 2nd. It explicitly indicates that it's for the support of armed citizien militias. But such things do not exist anymore. Therefore the entire reason behind the 2nd is moot wrt to current gun ownership.

It's just a very big contradiction that is as clear as day. I'm not even saying that as a reason for getting rid of guns. It's just on a purely logical level, it's completely contradictory. If there's a rationale for unlimited gun ownership as it exists today, clearly the 2nd is not it.

[verve92]

Originally Posted by Shock Value

You're crazy, LOL... We as a nation are reasonable people and I don't see a Civil War on the horizon.

Depends what it is about. Rich vs poor, etc lots of reasons for it that could make it happen.
Lets hope it stays non-violent, but don't bet on it or you would not be tooling up, while one side isn't as much.
Something is gonna break and the cause will be irrelevant. The solution is relevant and I don't see one.
Do you?

[Shock Value]

Originally Posted by Dean Roddey

I never said it was likely to happen. I was just addressing your implying I was dumb because I failed to recognize that guys with hunting guns were a big part of the Revolutionary War, but then you immediately changed the goal again of it never happening or if it did that no one would cooperate, which are completely different things.

I was just pointing out that that's not relevant anymore, and that individuals owning weapons has zip to do with preventing military takeover of the country or with protecting the country against foreign invasion. It wouldn't be a factor at all. But, people in this thread were using them as reasons why guns are protected by the Constitution.

So the argument for protecting their use specially is a use for which they never come into play, and haven't for well over a hundred years. No one protecting this country is using his own weapons. And, with modern military technology what it is, they won't come into play ever again in any meaningful way.

Clearly the Constitution does not protect their ownership for any other reason. It's trivially obvious from reading the 2nd. It explicitly indicates that it's for the support of armed citizien militias. But such things do not exist anymore. Therefore the entire reason behind the 2nd is moot wrt to current gun ownership.

It's just a very big contradiction that is as clear as day. I'm not even saying that as a reason for getting rid of guns. It's just on a purely logical level, it's completely contradictory. If there's a rationale for unlimited gun ownership as it exists today, clearly the 2nd is not it.

Again, go read some more American History....

Depends what it is about. Rich vs poor, etc lots of reasons for it that could make it happen.
Lets hope it stays non-violent, but don't bet on it or you would not be tooling up, while one side isn't as much.
Something is gonna break and the cause will be irrelevant. The solution is relevant and I don't see one.
Do you?

Hey, only you are saying that a Civil War is imminent, and only YOU are the one wanting gun control.

I call bullshit again.

[Dean Roddey]

Originally Posted by Shock Value

Again, go read some more American History....

To learn what? You keep saying that, but perhaps you could provide a specific example of some sort that you think is relevant to the point I was making?

[JoRillo]

Originally Posted by Dean Roddey

I was just pointing out that that's not relevant anymore, and that individuals owning weapons has zip to do with preventing military takeover of the country or with protecting the country against foreign invasion. It wouldn't be a factor at all. But, people in this thread were using them as reasons why guns are protected by the Constitution.

Arguing against your point is stupid, simply for the reason that nothing I or anyone else says will change how YOU feel about the governments strength.

Personally, I feel if we ever fought citizen vs government and the military chose sides, the population would win hands down.

Your fear of the government is the reason I want more guns.

[Dean Roddey]

Originally Posted by JoRillo

Arguing against your point is stupid, simply for the reason that nothing I or anyone else says will change how YOU feel about the governments strength.

Personally, I feel if we ever fought citizen vs government and the military chose sides, the population would win hands down.

Your fear of the government is the reason I want more guns.

Once again... I never said I thought it was happen. You guys keep just going around in circles. You argue that owning guns is important to keep the government from taking over. But it clearly could not. The only way to prevent it is for people to just not cooperate in the process. Their owning guns, should the military actually be involved, would be meaningless given the state of military technology.

And the same goes for protecting against foreign invasion, ostensibly the reason behind the 2nd Amendment. Private guns would be meaningless, other than as petty annoyance after the fact. And, again, I don't think it would happen, but nonetheless if it's going to be used as a rational for allowing unlimited gun ownship then it needs to be remotely likely to be valid in such a use, which it just won't be.

So the whole thing is a contradiction, but you just keep running from one end to the other on each round.