2nd Amendment - what's the point? | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

2nd Amendment - what's the point?

ezra said:
I'd never be able to live with myself if I took someone else's life. No matter whom. Imagine living with that for the rest of your life. If I lived in a bad neighborhood, like I used to not too long ago, I could consider buying a baseball bat for deterrence. Why isn't that enough for everybody? I can't see any reason for regular people to carry firearms.
Click to expand...

Many warrior cultures believe death in battle is a more noble and honorable way to die than by natural means. I, sometimes as well, often feel I would rather die by the hands of another than through illness or infirmity. I am a believer in euthanasia and the right to die as well as a belief in merciful killing.

Should someone so sick of mind that they feel the need to kill me or my loved ones, I would have no hesitation or regret in granting them a merciful passing nor would I bear any ill will towards the thought that they might accomplish their goal and take my life.
 
hush said:
Just stopping by to point out one thing.

"Ammendment."

Have fun with the civil, respectful discussion though. : )
Click to expand...

Reported
 
ezra said:
I'd never be able to live with myself if I took someone else's life. No matter whom. Imagine living with that for the rest of your life. If I lived in a bad neighborhood, like I used to not too long ago, I could consider buying a baseball bat for deterrence. Why isn't that enough for everybody? I can't see any reason for regular people to carry firearms.
Click to expand...

Something that you're not willing to actually use is a bluff, not a deterrent.
 
Matt3737 said:
Many warrior cultures believe death in battle is a more noble and honorable way to die than by natural means. I, sometimes as well, often feel I would rather die by the hands of another than through illness or infirmity. I am a believer in euthanasia and the right to die as well as a belief in merciful killing.

Should someone so sick of mind that they feel the need to kill me or my loved ones, I would have no hesitation or regret in granting them a merciful passing nor would I bear any ill will towards the thought that they might accomplish their goal and take my life.
Click to expand...

Taking another person's life is the ultimate theft that you can make. There's a reason why it's been banned since the time of the Old Testament. If we're going into dogmatic discussions about the perfection of an amendment to a legal paper from the 18th century, I think that it's relevant to bring that up.
 
ezra said:
Taking another person's life is the ultimate theft that you can make. There's a reason why it's been banned since the time of the Old Testament. If we're going into dogmatic discussions about the perfection of an amendment to a legal paper from the 18th century, I think that it's relevant to bring that up.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I can summarize your statement. If someone else were to feel the need to steal my life for whatever reason (a hypothetically unjustifiable reason) and I were to do unto them in response (the golden rule) where no known alternative was possible or foreseeable, you'd still condemn me as being the thief?

Well, I figure that your thoughts and feelings were your own problem because I'd still be at peace with that. You couldn't stop me without force and then you'd only be in conflict with your own beliefs.
 
Whatever the history/historical situation of the 2nd, in the present and into the future it seems to be inadequate to the reasonable view that some individuals/sections of the population should never be allowed to bear arms.

A possible amendment could be that only land and house owners be allowed to bear arms. This, in principal could be derived from the recognition of a right to defend oneself against aggressors. Personal defense is a mobile activity, if there is danger ahead on the road, it is better to avoid/bypass it, than to engage it. No one can claim that a defense must be engaged in this particular place/location, unless that person has some claim to this particular place/location - hence land/building ownership. Perhaps? At least this would get guns out of the hands of people who are more likely to be attacking/pillaging property, than defending it.
 
Same bull#$%^ from the same people. Anti-gun lobbyists. Your innocent-looking inquiries humor me. How many forums do you guys pollute?
 
just me said:
Same bull#$%^ from the same people. Anti-gun lobbyists. Your innocent-looking inquiries humor me. How many forums do you guys pollute?
Click to expand...

Actually, as I reside in Australia, I am more pro-gun (given that our gun laws are over-restrictive). However, if I were in the U.S. I probably would be for gun restriction, because the laws there seem too lax. I wouldn't want to get a gun pulled on me by some crack addict.

I think that gun laws in the U.S. should be revised such that people who have a responsible use of guns should be in no way affected by new laws, but those who use guns to further illegal ends, should experience real/effective restriction. Ie. Not restricting guns per se, but laws that target specific groups/individuals.

Anyhow, I'm no lobbyist for any cause.
 
just me said:
Same bull#$%^ from the same people. Anti-gun lobbyists. Your innocent-looking inquiries humor me. How many forums do you guys pollute?
Click to expand...

Lobbyist is a job, not a political standpoint
 
Matt3737 said:
Let me see if I can summarize your statement. If someone else were to feel the need to steal my life for whatever reason (a hypothetically unjustifiable reason) and I were to do unto them in response (the golden rule) where no known alternative was possible or foreseeable, you'd still condemn me as being the thief?

Well, I figure that your thoughts and feelings were your own problem because I'd still be at peace with that. You couldn't stop me without force and then you'd only be in conflict with your own beliefs.
Click to expand...

I always believe that there is an alternative to murder. Disarming the other person, surrendering, simply talking to the other person.

I'm not going to condemn anyone, I just don't understand the logic behind murder, and I wonder if people truly realize the consequences thereof ...
 
ezra said:
And the business of the person you'd kill
Click to expand...
So you try and take a jab anyway. Want a commendation or something?

Fact is, I believe death is part of life. This is something that you obviously have no hope to comprehend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back