Why would the Government have guns if they were outlawed/controlled? With the exception of departments like law enforcement and defence force, there's nobody who should need them.
Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion
Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.
Americans feel safer living in armed community
- Thread starter Jazzy
- Start date
Evil Eye said:
Plenty. You can govern and follow the same laws as everyone else. Otherwise what we have is a corrupt government. If the police can carry AR-15 the law abiding citizens should be allowed to carry a AR-15. If our police can militarize like they seem to be doing across the country beyond there mandate then the people should be allowed to the same thing. The government needs to be feared by the people more then we should ever fear the government. Thats how freedom stays free.
The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense, and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law. But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the role of man’s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a criminal vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his.
Ayn Rand
A government has more rights than its people by definition, the people give up these rights to their government. Your quote mentions the courts, police and military. Those are the right of judgement, civil order and defence (and offence) of a "group". As a citizen you're not allowed to pass judgement (mostly) or write laws. As a citizen you're not allowed to hunt down criminals (again, mostly). And I don't believe maintaining a standing army as a private person/corporation is entirely legal either most of the time, not to mention the right to declare war/make peace.
Uhm, I'll just assume you meant that the government should fear its people because they're supposed to be the ones employing them - which I would agree with. A government has no more power than it is given.TRUE LIBERTY said:
Evil Eye said:
A American government had certain rights we the people gave them making them equal with the people. What we have now is a government taking the powers we gave them and then ignoring the laws and standards put upon them and going way beyond what was given.
Given the current atmosphere in DC, with everything those assholes have done (President, House, Senate, and Court)
The below is now meaningless:
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am10.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
The below is now meaningless:
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am10.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
