the three things I harp on...

[lazs2]

democracy only works if limits, peoples rights, are clearly spelled out and the sheep are not allowed to step on those rights.

lazs

[-dead-]

Ooops even more of an anti-Lazs -- I don't work for a state-owned industry.

Lazs' reliance on cars for freedom is also a reliance on the state. Roads are mostly state-built and owned (ergo socialism), and driving is submitting to the will of the government: in that you are only able to go where the state lets you.

Which is why I don't have a car -- I live on an island with no roads wide enough for cars. I moved there in no small part precisely because of that: freedom from cars is a desirable luxury to me (as is freedom from guns). Which just goes to show that freedom has no absolute definition.

[chancevought]

lazs2 is way outta line with this one..see rule 1- 100

I'm a blue voter and I love guns..I believe everyone shud have them and I believe we should use them more, on each other

I love my 68 impala and my 170 mph motorcycle

I'm an individualist, and I've never passed a law ( but I've broken countless ones)

I'm not religious, but if I'm not mistaken isn't part of any religion to care for all of ones neighbors, since we are all brothers and sisters? That would make anyone true to their religion a socialist...

Yes there are too many laws that are jus plane silly, but red voters voted on them too...Laws can't save someone from themselves...

The reason this country cant unite is close-minded people that are so quick to seperate themselves from others and to judge others as being less than themselves...We are all the same regardless of social standing, religion, politics, race or gender....

This ONE nation was founded on that principle...a place where u could be what you wanted and had to answer to no one but your god (if you so choosed to have one).  We all should recognize this...it's the ONE thing we should all agree on, otherwise we would have stayed in whatever country we are from. We are all different...and that should be what we LOVE about each other...THAT is what makes us Americans!

[Mark Luper]

Nice post Chance



Mark

[lazs2]

chance... wrong on every level.    I don't care what you do personaly... I only care how it affects me.

The fact that you vote for socialism and the removal of rights through your representitives is all I care about..  While you may be fine as an individual... your insistance, through your voting, that I pay for socialism and the removal of my rights makes you the enemy...  

Many blue people are in favor of guns for themselves... all the politicians and movie stars for instance want bodyguards... that does not make them my friend or... a friend of the second...  your voting record makes you the enemy of the second.

same for cars.... same thing..  your, "do as I say not as I do" way of living is not useful to me.  you are the enemy by virtue of how you vote... by the representitives you elect.

religion...   sorry... won't wash... you don't go to prison for not giving money to religions.  just that simple.   I don't think the government knows how to take care of the poor with my money better than I do...  You dissagree apparently... You feel that only the government can help the poor.   You are wrong.

You should understand that we are one nation founded on the principals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness... It is not your job to define happiness for me or to guarantee any outcome.   so stop meddling...   that homeless guy?  for all you know he is doing exactly what he wants.  None of your business...even worse... it is not your right to take my property from me and redistribute it...

So no... according to your defenition... we can never be one country....  You want to meddle in my affairs too much... you are the enemy.

lazs

[lazs2]

and dead...  you are of course wrong too...  you act like the only way a road can ever be built and maintained is by a socialist.

The way they get worse is through socialism.   the way you get less for your money is through socialism... It is like taking bids and then seeing what company is the most wasteful and least efficient and then choosing them.

by your reasoning no railroad or airline could have ever been built without the government...

If we want good roads we simply take the gas tax and bid out the maitenance and operation... way better than what we have now.

As for guns..  we are free to not own a gun here just as you are.   The difference is that we are also free (for now) to choose.

For you to say that your laws make it certain that you will never be on the wrong end of a gun or to ever be in a position to need one... well..  you have freedom only in your head.  It is not real.. it is based on lack of experiance.

lazs

[Quah!]

For you to say that your laws make it certain that you will never be on the wrong end of a gun or to ever be in a position to need one... well.. you have freedom only in your head. It is not real.. it is based on lack of experiance.

Bingo - Talk to the 2,600 Chinese that lost their lives in Tiananmen Square protests, they were on the wrong side of a gun, your governments gun's.  Without the right to bear arms you lose the ability to revolt against power corrupted as seen and proven by your people, and thusly hand over total control to the powers that be.

With a real taste of Freedom you would not be able to accept the notion of being the anti Lazs.

[-dead-]

Originally posted by Quah!
Bingo - Talk to the 2,600 Chinese that lost their lives in Tiananmen Square protests, they were on the wrong side of a gun, your governments gun's.  Without the right to bear arms you lose the ability to revolt against power corrupted as seen and proven by your people, and thusly hand over total control to the powers that be.

With a real taste of Freedom you would not be able to accept the notion of being the anti Lazs.

Reality checks:
1. The students in Tian'anmen were part of a peaceful protest. So the gun ownership issue really has little bearing. Had they turned up with guns, I suspect they would have been killed on day one or day two.
3. Small arms are no defence against tanks. Ask a Palestinian.
4. Ownership of small arms is not necessary to have the ability to revolt against power corrupted. It can be taken back without the need for weaponry. Ask an Indian.
5. Ownership of small arms does not confer the ability to revolt against power corrupted even in the US. Ask a Branch Davidian.

I don't see cars or guns as freedoms. They're merely products, and have proved entirely unnecessary to own throughout my life. Freedom is entirely subjective -- I think if you believe you need a gun or a car to be free, you're already in a cage.

[lukster]

Originally posted by -dead-
Reality checks:
4. Ownership of small arms is not necessary to have the ability to revolt against power corrupted. It can be taken back without the need for weaponry. Ask an Indian.

American or South Asian?

[lazs2]

dead... apples and oranges..  you need to look at a country who's government took over from an armed citizenry against their will...  I would contend that having an armed citizenry is one of the reasons we have not been attacked from within or without.

And..  it is not just that... burglary and assault are tyranny and life threatening... are you saying that it is impossible for you to be attacked (or anyone no matter how weak) in your commie paradise?   That it is not possible?   if so...  why is that?   is it because evil people don't have guns?   that it never occurs to them that guns or not... they can overpower you?    

Perhaps you have not needed a gun up until now... are you saying that no one in your country has ever wanted a gun... then needed one and, because of your defenition of "freedom" was then tryranized or killed because you knew what was best for them?

are you really that stupid?   Is your defenition of freedom so bizarre?    Freedom is choice.. without choice you have no freedom.  

Who is more in a cage... me who feels that everyone should have the ability to defend themselves if they need and that most people around me are good and capable of adult decisions or.... you who feel that people are not smart enough to make choices on an individual level and that given the choice...  they would become a danger to you.... you don't even trust your fellow man with a tool.  

You are correct tho that if you limit the types of firearms enough then they become worthless for anything.    otherwise...  they can easily defeat any government.

It shocks and amuses  me that you liberal socialists all feel a few dirt poor insurgents with ancient ak47's can defeat the best efforts of a dedicated U.S. military with all the support it needs....  yet... you feel that 80-150 million gun owners and citizens couldn't stand up to a half hearted force of maybe 1 million and a few tanks.

lazs

lazs

[john9001]

Originally posted by -dead-

3. Small arms are no defence against tanks. Ask a Palestinian.
4. Ownership of small arms is not necessary to have the ability to revolt against power corrupted. It can be taken back without the need for weaponry. Ask an Indian.
5. Ownership of small arms does not confer the ability to revolt against power corrupted even in the US. Ask a Branch Davidian.
 

Cuba, Fidel Castro.

[FastFwd]

From what I�ve read, -dead- and pei are never wrong!

[Slash27]

Originally posted by -dead-
Reality checks:
1. The students in Tian'anmen were part of a peaceful protest. So the gun ownership issue really has little bearing. Had they turned up with guns, I suspect they would have been killed on day one or day two.
3. Small arms are no defence against tanks. Ask a Palestinian.
4. Ownership of small arms is not necessary to have the ability to revolt against power corrupted. It can be taken back without the need for weaponry. Ask an Indian.
5. Ownership of small arms does not confer the ability to revolt against power corrupted even in the US. Ask a Branch Davidian.

I don't see cars or guns as freedoms. They're merely products, and have proved entirely unnecessary to own throughout my life. Freedom is entirely subjective -- I think if you believe you need a gun or a car to be free, you're already in a cage.

Weak.

[lazs2]

slash...it is not weak if you define "freedom" as the freedom to do whatever you want and the freedom to restrict anyone you don't agree with from having the same rights.

he did admit that he believes there are different types of "freedom"  a common commie mantra.

lazs

[republic]

Originally posted by -dead-

I don't see cars or guns as freedoms. They're merely products, and have proved entirely unnecessary to own throughout my life. Freedom is entirely subjective -- I think if you believe you need a gun or a car to be free, you're already in a cage.

I dunno, I've always felt that a car, at least as an American, is the defining symbol of freedom.  At 16 we are given this freedom, we can travel anywhere in our nation without paperwork, permission...or anything.

You get up one morning and want to go see the Alamo?  Then go.  You want to see where a random dirt road leads...you go.

I'm sure it's probably a cultural difference, I suspect in China they have more mass transit alternatives than we have here.  I imagine if everyone in China owned 2 vehicles, as is common in America, they would have nothing but gridlock.

One of my favorite things in life, is to hop in my old Nissan, and see where a road goes.  Really, imo....that's freedom incarnate.