AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!

Shooting Outside the Empire State Building

  • ** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **
    Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
Status
Not open for further replies.
mynameisbob84 said:
Bocefish said:
People who are anti-gun will likely never understand.

Quite possibly. But then the flipside of that is the pro-gun folk not being able to see how people who don't live in places where guns aren't readily available feel safer as a result. I'm only 27 but not once in my life have I ever felt I needed to own a gun.
If we accept the theory that not owning a gun puts me at greater risk of burglary or rape or any other type of crime as fact, I still feel safer than I would if I (and crucially, everyone else) could just walk into a shop and buy a gun.

Totally understandable point of view. We do have a system of checks and balances for who can legally purchase weapons along with a waiting period, but it's far from perfect. Then again, there is no perfect system. If somebody really wants a gun regardless of their criminal history, country, laws in place... they'll probably find a way. Same goes with mass murderers, if they're nuts enough and can't get pre-manufactured weapons for whatever reason, they'll build a bomb, concoct some fatal chemical cocktails, poisons or whatever.
 
Jupiter551 said:
Yeah but firstly, how many times have you - or really any western democratic government - had the need to actually take up arms against your government in the last 200 years?
Well actually, America isn't a "democracy" we're technically a republic. but yeah, not many, which I give a good amount of credit to the fact that so many of us use our right to keep and bare arms. Also, once a government has gone to this extremes it's cease to be a republic or democracy any more... it now a tyrannical dictatorship.

Secondly, if the police and/or armed forces were on the side of the government do you think you'd win?
tumblr_ldzu4pOZPc1qawxl1o1_400.jpg


Thirdly, if the police and/or army or part thereof sided with the people, couldn't you just use their armaments anyway? If I was part of a real rebellion fighting against regular army troops I'd be using one of their assault rifles first chance I could get my hands on one.
Yes but until I could get my hands on one, I'd still like the option to have some kind of fire arm of my own at least
 
It's true, the US is not a pure democracy, but neither is or has been any country in history, but neither are we "just a republic." When Jefferson and his like-thinking pals created the "Democratic-Republican Party" from the "Anti-Federalists," they were making a bit of a statement. We are a republic with democratic institutions, and who select their representatives using a democratic system of elections.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Poker_Babe
Bocefish said:
Totally understandable point of view. We do have a system of checks and balances for who can legally purchase weapons along with a waiting period, but it's far from perfect. Then again, there is no perfect system. If somebody really wants a gun regardless of their criminal history, country, laws in place... they'll probably find a way. Same goes with mass murderers, if they're nuts enough and can't get pre-manufactured weapons for whatever reason, they'll build a bomb, concoct some fatal chemical cocktails, poisons or whatever.
And now I'm suddenly reminded of that scene in the movie "In the Line of Fire" where John Malkovich makes that plastic gun to shoot the president.
 
Nordling said:
It's true, the US is not a pure democracy, but neither is or has been any country in history, but neither are we "just a republic." When Jefferson and his like-thinking pals created the "Democratic-Republican Party" from the "Anti-Federalists," they were making a bit of a statement. We are a republic with democratic institutions, and who select their representatives using a democratic system of elections.
(And now I reminded of... ) I can't remember who but I think it was Ben Franklin that said,
"democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what on whats for dinner." or something like that LOL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bob
Poker_Babe said:
Nordling said:
It's true, the US is not a pure democracy, but neither is or has been any country in history, but neither are we "just a republic." When Jefferson and his like-thinking pals created the "Democratic-Republican Party" from the "Anti-Federalists," they were making a bit of a statement. We are a republic with democratic institutions, and who select their representatives using a democratic system of elections.
(And now I reminded of... ) I can't remember who but I think it was Ben Franklin that said,
"democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what on whats for dinner." or something like that LOL.
lol true, or at least the meaning of the quote. That's why the founders set up a system with checks and balances, and wrote the Bill of Rights to prevent a dictatorship of the mob, which can be just as bad as any other kind of dictatorship. Right now, we're in danger of losing our freedom to special interests (Citizens United decision), and frankly, it scares the hell out of me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.