I don't like gods. I don't want to worship one. I don't want you to worship one either. I think freedom of religion was the stupidest thing our forefathers gave us in the Constitution. If it were up to me, you'd have no right to worship a god and it'd be nigh impossible to find one in this country. I don't care if the great majority of religious people are responsible; the bad actors spoil it for everyone else. See how that sounds if you just change a few words.
In any hypothetical breakdown of American society, we will have more to fear from some of these armed to the teeth firearm wielding citizens than any government military or invading force. Hi neighbor, I'll just be taking your food, money, and any spare ammunition and guns.
Great comparison. Now pretend you're a drunken redneck and try picking up "god" then pull the trigger while aiming at someone who accidentally stepped on your lawn... Also isn't it a bit futile to be talking about gun control with Texans? I know we got people from all around the world here but it's still a Houston Rockets forum.
I don't see anyone killing people at the direction of their Guns but millions of people have been killed for the Love of Gods.
Yeah, it sounds completely irrelavent. If our forefathers had written a right to clubbing baby seals into the Constitution, would it benefit from the same comparison?
Religion kills more than guns do. Say there are no guns, people will make bombs. Say there are no bombs, people will kill with their bare hands. Now... Say there is no religion, people will still kill; but at least they won't kill in the name of god. I'm not against people believing what they want to believe in; but guns don't kill people. People kill people, with guns.
My reaction to this in smilies. then then then You should have more faith in America and Americans then a foreign government military force invading the USA. That's sad - were you joking or being sarcastic? My meter is broken
Come on, man: I did call it a "hypothetical doomsday scenario." I hardly think The End is Near. Do we know that it doesn't? Nukes would completely and utterly destroy everything, making the land uninhabitable and unusable for a lifetime or three. Anyone wanting to conquer a land, people, resources, etc. still requires boots on the ground in some form or fashion. Did we not consider an armed populace when going into Afghanistan? I can't imagine that we didn't.
Considering the attitudes and hostile behavior I witnessed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana, there's no telling how people will react in a complete breakdown of American society. Seems in the last ten years I'm encountering more and more 'survivalist' Americans at the firing ranges. They talk about 9/11 conspiracies, the Illuminati, Bilderberg Group, stuff Alex Jones believes in. Americans at the end of the day are humans. We have it better than most, but take those comforts away, and our inner demons are unleashed - whatever it takes to survive. Fights may erupt at grocery stores or gas stations because of food and fuel shortages, mobs might riot outside banks trying to get their savings out, protests in front of Congress, etc. These books come to mind when I think of the end of civilization:
First off my post was a joke. the reason behind having guns is not fighting an army but for protecting myself and my family. But to go down this silly road, the US army had serious problem occupying Vietnam and Iraq against less people who had less organization, less technical knowledge, less equipment and less ability to communicate. Piss off some farmers with camo 4 wheelers, night vision and a tons of diesel and ammonium nitrate then get back with about your helo's.
Yeah if its just all of society breaking down but in the post I was referring to it's because of a military invader into the US.
Second of all, I didn't know it was a joke, but the point is still relevant. Still going down the same silly road. Ghenghis Khan hand no problem occupying most of the Middle East and Asian without any problems, against more equipped and organized opponents. The only difference being, they were willing to wiped out entire cities... to the last man. Once you make a few cities disappear whole sale, I'm pretty sure others will get in line.
And I agree with you. Guns should be used to protect your family and home, and for fun at the range. I'm just saying, this talk about well maintain militia against the government is unrealistic. Modern Army without restraints vs. civilians with guns = slaughter.
Who is going to do that? Your arguments are crazy. At least mine are based in reality. No occupying force does that today, or else they will have no cooperators. Even Nazi knows that.
What army will have no restraints? How can you seriously put that in there? No modern war is like that.
I thought we were going down the silly road. Thoughts of conflicts in Africa comes to mind. Not modern armies, but the same mentality can carry through.
