5 ms·

300 million plus guns in the hands of 100 million plus citizens say "ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ" ... and as for my "hobby" of armed self-defense, that's a "too fucking bad" rig

by hga 11y ago

300 million plus guns in the hands of 100 million plus citizens say "ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ" ... and as for my "hobby" of armed self-defense, that's a "too fucking bad" right back at you. But let's get back to topic: this right is enshrined in our highest law. You don't entirely like it (I'm assuming you're willing to call armed police to protect yourself), but by what principle do you propose to infringe it without, you know, the other ones that e.g. prevent the Congress from passing a bill of attainder that orders you and everyone else contributing to the Windows ecosystem into a computer free concentration camp.

coldpie 11y ago
It is a hobby, don't kid yourself. I would enthusiastically support a repeal of the 2nd amendment. It was a product of its time, and its time has passed. In any case, it is so incredibly vague that your argument can be used to support private ownership of nuclear weapons.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Untrue. To "bear arms" had a particular well-known meaning at the time of writing. So had "militia". The defense of Americans to keep arms is not a mysterious or strained interpretation. And since people haven't changed in 200 years, I'm not sure why the time passing has any meaning. Examples abound. Look to "The Battle of Athens" in 1946 for an early one. But I'm afraid I'm just feeding the troll. I detect no honest attempt to understand or discuss this topic.
  - hga 11y ago
    Well, there is one thing he brought up that also has a parallel to the topic of hand. Weapons of mass destruction and trivial to make perfect digital copies do qualitatively change the facts on the ground in ways we suspect our Founders did not anticipate. And while there's no great interest let alone lobby for citizen possession of WMDs, in the digital media realm....
Amorymeltzer 11y ago
For those, like me, who were confused by the Greek: >Molon labe, meaning "come and take", is a classical expression of defiance. When the Persian armies demanded that the Greeks surrender their weapons at the Battle of Thermopylae, King Leonidas I responded with this phrase. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe
Retric 11y ago
Using 100million gun owners and 12,000 deaths/year that's close to 1% of gun owners killing someone in there lifetime. Which seems like a huge issue for a hobby. Sure, cars are slightly worse, but cars are also really useful. Back on topic, border searches far from the actual border seem like a more obvious constitutional issue.
- hga 11y ago
  Except, of course, the right enshrined in the 2nd Amendment has nothing to directly do with hobbies, and without (major) complaint hobbies like hunting are seriously regulated and constrained. One also wonders if police carry guns as a "hobby" ... or if, they're, you know, actually useful. Seeing as civilians in the US report using them more than a couple of million times a year, which trivially swamps the 1% you come up with above, which also ignores that deaths caused by guns are even more concentrated in perpetrators than those by cars.... But let's extend this hobby line of thought. Listening to music is much more "frivolous" than defending you and yours from those who would do them harm, so by the principle you've enunciated above, copyright restrictions could be even more harsh. Are border searches far from the border getting the judicial deference that perpetual copyrights and no right to bear arms are getting in the Federal courts? All I can remember in detail about this is citizens "on the ground" successfully, at least at times, reporting refusing them on the obvious 4th Amendment grounds. Which I assume means the authorities are not eager to test them in court.
  - Retric 11y ago
    I propose we replace guns with bows. Just as deadly for hunting, self-defense, and law enforcement, much harder for a 4 year old to kill someone and a lower risk for mass shootings or bystander’s. PS: In many countries most of the police are generally unarmed, so this is still better defense than that. </only half joking> Still, you really can frame the debate as "let's kill 1 million Americans over the next 100 years!" which IMO needs a stronger defense than "But but FREEDOM !!1!1!!"
    - hga 11y ago

by hga 11y ago

coldpie 11y ago

It is a hobby, don't kid yourself. I would enthusiastically support a repeal of the 2nd amendment. It was a product of its time, and its time has passed. In any case, it is so incredibly vague that your argument can be used to support private ownership of nuclear weapons.

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
Untrue. To "bear arms" had a particular well-known meaning at the time of writing. So had "militia". The defense of Americans to keep arms is not a mysterious or strained interpretation. And since people haven't changed in 200 years, I'm not sure why the time passing has any meaning. Examples abound. Look to "The Battle of Athens" in 1946 for an early one. But I'm afraid I'm just feeding the troll. I detect no honest attempt to understand or discuss this topic.
- hga 11y ago
  Well, there is one thing he brought up that also has a parallel to the topic of hand. Weapons of mass destruction and trivial to make perfect digital copies do qualitatively change the facts on the ground in ways we suspect our Founders did not anticipate. And while there's no great interest let alone lobby for citizen possession of WMDs, in the digital media realm....

Amorymeltzer 11y ago

For those, like me, who were confused by the Greek: >Molon labe, meaning "come and take", is a classical expression of defiance. When the Persian armies demanded that the Greeks surrender their weapons at the Battle of Thermopylae, King Leonidas I responded with this phrase. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe

Retric 11y ago

Using 100million gun owners and 12,000 deaths/year that's close to 1% of gun owners killing someone in there lifetime. Which seems like a huge issue for a hobby. Sure, cars are slightly worse, but cars are also really useful. Back on topic, border searches far from the actual border seem like a more obvious constitutional issue.

hga 11y ago
Except, of course, the right enshrined in the 2nd Amendment has nothing to directly do with hobbies, and without (major) complaint hobbies like hunting are seriously regulated and constrained. One also wonders if police carry guns as a "hobby" ... or if, they're, you know, actually useful. Seeing as civilians in the US report using them more than a couple of million times a year, which trivially swamps the 1% you come up with above, which also ignores that deaths caused by guns are even more concentrated in perpetrators than those by cars.... But let's extend this hobby line of thought. Listening to music is much more "frivolous" than defending you and yours from those who would do them harm, so by the principle you've enunciated above, copyright restrictions could be even more harsh. Are border searches far from the border getting the judicial deference that perpetual copyrights and no right to bear arms are getting in the Federal courts? All I can remember in detail about this is citizens "on the ground" successfully, at least at times, reporting refusing them on the obvious 4th Amendment grounds. Which I assume means the authorities are not eager to test them in court.
- Retric 11y ago
  I propose we replace guns with bows. Just as deadly for hunting, self-defense, and law enforcement, much harder for a 4 year old to kill someone and a lower risk for mass shootings or bystander’s. PS: In many countries most of the police are generally unarmed, so this is still better defense than that. </only half joking> Still, you really can frame the debate as "let's kill 1 million Americans over the next 100 years!" which IMO needs a stronger defense than "But but FREEDOM !!1!1!!"
  - hga 11y ago