You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #35: Calm down [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
George_Bonanza Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-03 03:51 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. Calm down
What does it matter if the Swiss militia is not voluntary? The fact is that something of an organized militia exists. If you seriously want a militia in America, than something similar to the Swiss program could be instituted. However, since I believe not every American would take kindly to potential conscription, I merely suggested that it should be voluntary. Sheesh.

Tasers do not cause instant freeze? http://www.mjbselfprotection.com/airtaserinfo.php. I do not know what kind of taser you were hit with. So these taser guys are just blatantly lying and nobody has sued their pants off? Perhaps you were just hit with a weaker taser.

Ah, gun show loopholes. On every search engine I go to, the name "Kopel" and "fictitious fraud" usually come up when I type in "Gun Control Loopholes". If it's true, then scrap that from the table.

Look, I'm trying to conceive of a kinder alternative world of self-defense here. Maybe the role of judge, jury, and potential executioner does not belong in the hands of people. If handguns can be legitimately replaced with tasers or tranqs, and militias can be unheld by Swiss-like programs, then I sincerely believe that's a better world to live in than holding guns at each other's throats, daring one another to give it a shot. When the Founding Fathers made the 2nd amendment, they were basically giving every individual the right to defend themselves. It does not necessarily have to be a lethal device.

BTW, I do not think the Assault Weapons ban is a logical act. It's definition of an assault weapon is very flimsy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC