|
|
and re: ronpaul
fwiw, i feel that a lot of his ideas are archaic. i donated money to his campaign and i would do it again, so dont take me wrong. however i feel that he could have been a quasi-disaster, but i also feel that i dont understand political sciences nearly enough to speculate with any accuracy.
anywho, as one example, i feel that the constitution is in a few ways outdated. it was written during colonial times when transportation and information was very slow. it was an excellent idea then for state governments to take as much of a role as they did, but not so much now. im not saying its bad, but that its much more questionable.
even something like the second amendment. it is very clear that we have the right to own guns, but how important is this right now? it used to be mega important back then, but it just simply doesn't seem to be now. iirc a big if not the biggest reason for the amendment was because britain tried to control the states by keeping guns out of their possession. well thats just not how it works now. first off postmodern europe is more progressed than we are and afaik they dont have guns. second, if we were to adhere to the meaning of the second amendment then guns like that used in hunting and firing ranges do not serve the purpose. back when the amendment was written it was musket vs musket, but now if the feds try to run us over our shotguns and glocks and rifles wont do shit because they have tanks and aircraft and night vision. so to adhere to the amendment correctly we should have militia with those as well, not just desert eagles.
not to mention that being overrun by the government in postmodern civilization will take on a very different method than it used to. 1. revolutionary war was essentially two nations warring, not civil. the civil war was even much like two nations warring. cannot forget how hudge the US was back then due to travel speeds, and that is a most important factor in keeping peace and uniformity. 2. the people are the government, at least moreso now than ever before. it could simply be that the installment of a democratic or republic it self eliminates the need for a militia to defend itself. the states were not fighting against a democracy, but a monarchy, and we should be aware that peace will only be found when the last king is strangled with the intestines of the last priest.
having said that, i am pro gun, i just like to call things what they are. if it was possible to secure our borders the way that some european nations can then i would be more appreciative of anti-gun policy, but even then im pro gun because guns that kill people are either illegal guns or owner accident, for the most part.
just one example
|
FUCK CAYLEE
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Renton
