Law POTWR 2019 Vol 4: Repeal Or Respect The 2nd Amendment?

[Cubo de Sangre]

Hawaii Senate Urges Repeal of the Second Amendment, Introduces Red Flag Bill

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...he-second-amendment-introduces-red-flag-bill/

This week, a resolution was introduced in the Hawaii state Senate calling on the U.S. Congress to change or repeal the Second Amendment. This resolution shows a gross disregard for individual liberties that the United States was founded upon.

_______________________________

@Cubo de Sangre

Now the people of Hawaii can see as plain as day what the political class of Hawaii truly desires.

The era of political movements hiding their true desires behind carefully chosen and manipulative language, is soon coming to an end.

Yeah, we'll see how the local bills progress. Not too concerned that HI is gonna spur a repeal of the 2nd.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

Yeah, we'll see how the local bills progress. Not too concerned that HI is gonna spur a repeal of the 2nd.

While I agree with your statement, that wasn't really the point I was making.

The political class of Hawaii is now open with their distain for your most basic of human Rights.

It follows a basic political theory that you're going to get a bigger gap between the will of the people and the actions of the political class if it's in an area with very nice weather. The nice weather will make people tolerate greater political corruption and malfeasance because they live in a good climate that will make them less likely to vote with their feet.

I've actually read you state nearly as much on this forum a few times. I believe this to be the reason that places like Greece, and California also have an apparent gap between the political will of the people, and the political actions of their political classes.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

While I agree with your statement, that wasn't really the point I was making.

The political class of Hawaii is now open with their distain for your most basic of human Rights.

It follows a basic political theory that you're going to get a bigger gap between the will of the people and the actions of the political class if it's in an area with very nice weather. The nice weather will make people tolerate greater political corruption and malfeasance because they live in a good climate that will make them less likely to vote with their feet.

I've actually read you state nearly as much on this forum a few times. I believe this to be the reason that places like Greece, and California also have an apparent gap between the political will of the people, and the political actions of their political classes.

I'm not sure about the "political class". Could just be we're an overwhelmingly blue state and we've got some new assholes in state government looking to create a legacy for themselves. I am pretty sure there's not crime wave and we've got low rates of gun violence so they're certainly concerning themselves with an unimportant matter.

Yeah, the nice weather affects my tolerance for bullshit. Weather is the only reason I'm here.

 

[Higus]

Saw an interesting video over the weekend. A common argument against gun control is to bring up the disarming Jews during Nazi Germany. This video cuts the legs from that particular argument. FWIW, I don't recall anyone trying to bring it up in this thread. Thoughts?

@Cubo de Sangre @Farmer Br0wn @spamking

 

[Gregolian]

Saw an interesting video over the weekend. A common argument against gun control is to bring up the disarming Jews during Nazi Germany. This video cuts the legs from that particular argument. FWIW, I don't recall anyone trying to bring it up in this thread. Thoughts?

@Cubo de Sangre @Farmer Br0wn @spamking

There's a part of me that gets the argument that even an organized group of citizens won't be able to stand up to tanks and A-10s.

There's also a part of me too that feels like the whole point of being an armed citizen is to not straight up fight the tanks but to be an armed resistance in the woods so to speak.

EDIT:
I hate referencing a goofy movie but Red Dawn is always brought up in these discussions by some people and even in THAT movie, they aren't straight up lining up and fighting battles with the Soviet tanks and shit. They're hitting patrols and doing that "running/gunning hit a small camp and then move" thing.

 

[Higus]

There's a part of me that gets the argument that even an organized group of citizens won't be able to stand up to tanks and A-10s.

There's also a part of me too that feels like the whole point of being an armed citizen is to not straight up fight the tanks but to be an armed resistance in the woods so to speak.

EDIT:
I hate referencing a goofy movie but Red Dawn is always brought up in these discussions by some people and even in THAT movie, they aren't straight up lining up and fighting battles with the Soviet tanks and shit. They're hitting patrols and doing that "running/gunning hit a small camp and then move" thing.

The video makes the argument that there was never really a point where armming Jews would have made a difference. There was a combination of a heavily armmed police force and persecution of minorities with the support of the general populace that made it possible. It puts liberal points of view in perspective: when they see a politician spouting nationalist rhetoric and getting people worked up against Communists, immigrants, non-Christians, and LGBT people, they can't help but see the parallels. I know people roll their eyes at the "literally Hitler" meme, but it's not like they don't have a point. And perhaps the greatest irony is that the people who want to be armed to prevent tyranny end up being the greatest supporters of it.

Side topic, from a very high level, I agree with the statement that "armed citizens can effectively use tactics to repel invaders", but there are much longer term consequences that need to be factored in.
Take Vietnam, for instance. After the war, a lot of the weapons ended up in the black market and went on to destabilize African countries. It's kind of like a large scale playing out of the trope that guns that are legally purchased but end up getting stolen or sold and used by criminals.

 

[Gregolian]

Take Vietnam, for instance. After the war, a lot of the weapons ended up in the black market and went on to destabilize African countries. It's kind of like a large scale playing out of the trope that guns that are legally purchased but end up getting stolen or sold and used by criminals.

Vietnam is a weird example for either side to use in this debate IMO.

Lots of pro-gun people will do the "dude's in black pajamas fought the Marines back and won" and the anti-gun folks will post the destabilizing impact that influx of guns had.

The problem I have is the Soviets and the Chinese supplied said guns and training to the guy's in pajamas and I would argue, those guns ended up in Africa because they were sold off basically by warlords.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Saw an interesting video over the weekend. A common argument against gun control is to bring up the disarming Jews during Nazi Germany. This video cuts the legs from that particular argument. FWIW, I don't recall anyone trying to bring it up in this thread. Thoughts?

@Cubo de Sangre @Farmer Br0wn @spamking

I don't know what happened in Germany back then. I'm pretty sure though that whenever a country backs non-government forces they ship in a bunch of small arms. Why do that if it isn't effective? Why does our military carry small arms if they aren't effective?

 

[Higus]

I don't know what happened in Germany back then. I'm pretty sure though that whenever a country backs non-government forces they ship in a bunch of small arms. Why do that if it isn't effective? Why does our military carry small arms if they aren't effective?

Bolded: The video is interesting if you want to learn about the events leading up to holocaust and put them in context to a gun control argument. I'm not sure what the latter part of the post is in reference to.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Bolded: The video is interesting if you want to learn about the events leading up to holocaust and put them in context to a gun control argument. I'm not sure what the latter part of the post is in reference to.

I have zero interest in WW2.

It's in reference to disarmament. Which is what I thought you were discussing.

 

[Higus]

I have zero interest in WW2.

It's in reference to disarmament. Which is what I thought you were discussing.

The video is a response to comments by Ben Carson and Ben Shapiro (and others) about how if Jews were armed prior to WW2, they could have defended against the Holocaust. It's not really about disarmament so much as it is about the historical context of what lead to WW2 and the Holocaust and how the argument falls apart when the details are examined.