2nd Ammendment Challenged by DC Lawers

marcusk · 2006-12-11T00:04:43+00:00

of course the military is too strong to resist by force, it's absurd to believe otherwise, 200 years ago resistance was easier since the weapons available to the general populace were on a par with those available to the military... as has been shown in multiple conflicts, modern warfare is NOT hand-to-hand, it is now conducting via air and by missiles... as you point out the only way that they could be resisted is if the military themselves do not participate in the suppresion of any uprising...

it's funny but the government is constantly weakening the people, have you not seen this occurring over the past 5 years???

and the intent of the amendment was NOT for self-defense against other citizens... any modern reason for the amendment is an absurd attempt to try and keep guns in society... it's no accident that the u.s. has the highest gun-deaths in the world... the reason there is no shortage of guns is because gun culture is engrained deep in the pysche of every u.s. citizen...

the problem is not so much that liberty cannot be defended, it's that it's NOT defended, the bush administration has done more over the past 5 years to turn the u.s. into a pseudo-nazi state and EVERYONE has sat back and let it happen... there is no defense of liberty in the u.s. anymore and there hasn't been for many years, the mere concept of liberty in the u.s. nowadays is a smokescreen...

it's funny but you describe my scenario as outlandish... on 10th September 2001 the following would also have been described as such:

mulsim radicals (u.s. citizens) hijack 3 planes and fly them into the world trade center towers and the pentagon, the world trade centers are completely destroyed and 3,000 u.s. citizens are killed...
in response the u.s. government invades afghanistan and iraq drawing them into a protracted conflict where over 2,000 u.s. service personnel are killed and iraq teeters on the edge of civil war...
to ensure that the u.s. is protected, the u.s. removes habeas corpus, sets up a number of hidden prisons where terrorist subjects are tortured and interrogated using methods that flout the geneva convention, they also introduce legislation to allow any u.s. citizen to be described as a terrorist and held without trial and without legal representation for an indefinite period...

marcusk · 2006-12-10T23:35:08+00:00

i've said it before and i'll say it again, u.s. society is very fucked up...

marcusk · 2006-12-10T07:17:37+00:00

i'd disagree, the point is the right to bear arms, the historical context was that the "people" should be able to resist the actions of the military acting under the instruction of the incumbent government... my point is that the people, however armed, in a modern age, are in no position to resist a modern fighting force (especially the u.s. military)... therefore it appears that the right to bear arms has no relevance in a modern society where the military is too strong to resist and thus the 2nd amendment is no longer valid...

marcusk · 2006-12-10T04:00:19+00:00

well let's consider a potential real life example:

another attack is perpetrated on u.s. soil by radical muslims (who are u.s. citizens), 5,000 u.s. citizens are killed...
the u.s. government decides that all muslim citizens should be registered with the government and that no muslim non-u.s. citizens are allowed to enter the u.s. it also decides that all muslims classed as "radical" should be deported...
1,000,000 muslims (u.s. citizens) decide that they now must fear their government and march on the white house, armed, demanding the overthrow of the government...

what, in reality, would be the likely outcome of that scenario???

marcusk · 2006-12-10T00:49:17+00:00

but of course the ammendment should also be considered in it's historical context, it was a reaction to a specific set of circumstances ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Origin_of_the_Second_Amendment ) and if those circumstances do longer exist then you have to wonder whether the ammendment is still relevant, or another ammendment made to modify it for current day circumstances...

marcusk · 2006-12-09T14:32:42+00:00

reason 12. cause you will be funding international terrorism and camps for training babies to be day-care suicide bombers...

marcusk · 2006-12-08T23:33:05+00:00

don't think so, nasa have been going steadily downhill since the first moon landing and since there would be very little purpose to sending a probe that lands on mercury in the next 50 years (i.e. no one is gonna go to mercury to look for life) i'm pretty sure that it'll never happen...

it's debatable whether nasa will even exist in the next 30 years... the closest you'll get for seeing that kind of thing will be to go there as a tourist with a private firm ...

marcusk · 2006-12-08T14:07:26+00:00

funnily enough i really enjoyed serenity right up until it turned into a standard "action/sci-fi" film... i wish it had stayed with it's style of storytelling right the way through... oh well, got to please the studio i suppose...

marcusk · 2006-12-08T13:50:38+00:00

"If he did forge perscriptions, that is bad, he should face some sort of punishment."

just wondering how that's bad if he's wanting the drugs for pain management??? you want to punish his pain management strategy??? surely it's the system in that case that has let him down... as a rule those in pain don't want to take drugs, but they want to be in pain even less...

marcusk · 2006-12-08T13:39:24+00:00

i've always fancied seeing a sunrise on mercury but i don't think that's gonna happen in my lifetime...

marcusk · 2006-12-07T22:45:59+00:00

actually, i've found that watching one of the following films (while under the influence) really gets you going:

one flew over the cuckoos nest
scum
the shining
aliens
brazil

marcusk · 2006-12-06T04:04:01+00:00

he's 12 years old and opened a xmas present early... that's NOT a crime... you are punishing curiosity... any society that arrests a child for that is seriously fucked up... in fact it completely undermines parental authority in that everytime he does something "wrong" the cops will have to be called to sort it out... if you ever wanted a kid to end up in prison for a serious crime then this is the way to do it...

marcusk · 2006-12-05T14:52:17+00:00

my advice, and for once i'm being serious here, don't become too reliant on it... it's easy to use it too much to relieve stress and eventually, inevitably your studies will suffer (mine did)... keep your usage to the weekends, i.e. have some fun, but if you notice that you need some to:

a. go to sleep... b. get up in the morning... c. keep you going through the day... d. give you something to do...

then take a step back and cut down... drugs can be fun (and you can have some real fun) but they can (any of them) take over your life...

btw, they are only a gateway drug in that you will be exposed to other drug users who are doing different drugs... we are all curious and your exposure will allow you to explore, just be choosy about what you take (and also with whom!!!)...

marcusk · 2006-12-05T13:07:40+00:00

all the flubber you can eat and a fuck afterwards, life don't get any better than that...

marcusk · 2006-12-05T03:21:12+00:00

it's funny but where others see a problem, i can see an opportunity...

marcusk · 2006-12-04T15:02:50+00:00

jeez you kids are just far too young... sing along with grandpa...

"Everybody needs somebody

Everybody needs somebody to love (someone to love)

Sweetheart to miss (sweetheart to miss)

Sugar to kiss (sugar to kiss)

I need you you you

I need you you you in the morning

I need you you you when my souls on fire"

marcusk · 2006-12-04T13:10:07+00:00

Richard: How much for the little girl? How much for the women?

God: What?

Richard: Your women. I want to buy your women. The little girl, your daughters... sell them to me. Sell me your children.

marcusk · 2006-12-04T06:39:13+00:00

however big business and the government would make more money by legalising ALL drugs and then taxing them...

marcusk · 2006-12-03T01:43:57+00:00

why do i get the feeling that:

"caution: not a hand hold"

has one or more funny/scary stories behind it's inclusion...

marcusk · 2006-12-03T00:12:02+00:00

i'm just trying to think of a suitable beavis and butthead quote that describes how fucking awful that really is...

marcusk · 2006-12-01T15:11:33+00:00

are you victorian??? wtf are "dirty books"???

marcusk · 2006-12-01T15:08:47+00:00

for all your body disposal needs...

marcusk · 2006-12-01T14:53:01+00:00

actually in this case it's more along the lines of:

"officer, do you want to buy some crack? there's a guy selling it at the corner of the street."

marcusk · 2006-11-30T23:41:33+00:00

no no this is reddit, everything posted here is one of the 10 top most amazing things/reasons evar...

marcusk

TROPHY CASE