Know your enemies

[CamoDeafie]

"I sometimes think that the bad guy is just a good guy who's having a bad day. You know that if you look at the data, the criminology, the sociology and what fascinated me most was the psychology of, really groundbreaking books written in the 70s, one called 'Violent Men,' one, 'Power and Innocence,' and makes the point that it's the good guy that you need to worry about is the good guy who has this sense of righteousness and the willingness to use violence."

What a load of crap.

Agreed. It's not the man who has a good morality, righteousness, and willingness to use violence to defend his family, himself and his property. It's the man who has no morals, no problems taking, no problems using violence to get what he wants, no feeling of guilt over using whatever method he uses to get whatever he wants. Only has a fear of being arrested, killed or judged by competent, moral people.

 

[Koda]

"ERDOZAIN: Well, it's such an illusion. I sometimes think that the bad guy is just a good guy who's having a bad day. You know that if you look at the data, the criminology, the sociology and what fascinated me most was the psychology of, really groundbreaking books written in the 70s, one called 'Violent Men,' one, 'Power and Innocence,' and makes the point that it's the good guy that you need to worry about is the good guy who has this sense of righteousness and the willingness to use violence."

Vilify the good guy, protect the bad guy. How does someone with such high levels of education get this ideology from? Why do we have such a huge disconnect with reality with such highly educated people?

 

[CamoDeafie]

Vilify the good guy, protect the bad guy. How does someone with such high levels of education get this ideology from? Why do we have such a huge disconnect with reality with such highly educated people?

By believing that "truth" is not objective, is subjective, by believing that all "truths" are equally valid, and by taking accountability and responsibility away from the individual and giving it to the State?

Believing the State to be sovereign, and not believing in gods and religions. By believing man is innately innocent and believing that "good" depends on who says it?

 

[Koda]

By believing that "truth" is not objective, is subjective, by believing that all "truths" are equally valid, and by taking accountability and responsibility away from the individual and giving it to the State?

Believing the State to be sovereign, and not believing in gods and religions. By believing man is innately innocent and believing that "good" depends on who says it?

If all truths are equally valid then who are they to tell others that an armed society is not a polite society, so to speak.
This is either a mental disorder or an intentional agenda to control others. Its not even a religious matter, the idea there are no truths is not based on reality.
A good person will not harm others, this is a truth.
A bad person is not really a good person just having a bad day, this is a truth.
A bad person is just a good person having a bad day, this is a fallacy.

We cannot change what is true, even if we disagree. But the disconnect is just too huge here.

 

[CamoDeafie]

This is either a mental disorder or an intentional agenda to control others. Its not even a religious matter, the idea there are no truths is not based on reality.

Why not both...?

 

[Koda]

Why not both...?

I suppose it could be, but its just odd so many people with such high educations suffer from a mental disorder. Most of it is rooted in propaganda. I'm just baffled at the disconnect with reality. Its not just about guns either, everything is tied together but the lack of reality in the extreme leftists movement is mind boggling, I'm trying to understand the why behind it but nothing about it makes sense.

 

[64MercurysRule]

Founding Fathers knew this .

 

[Cavedweller]

Agreed. It's not the man who has a good morality, righteousness, and willingness to use violence to defend his family, himself and his property. It's the man who has no morals, no problems taking, no problems using violence to get what he wants, no feeling of guilt over using whatever method he uses to get whatever he wants. Only has a fear of being arrested, killed or judged by competent, moral people.

You should write a book.

 

[Stomper]

I suppose it could be, but its just odd so many people with such high educations suffer from a mental disorder. Most of it is rooted in propaganda. I'm just baffled at the disconnect with reality. Its not just about guns either, everything is tied together but the lack of reality in the extreme leftists movement is mind boggling, I'm trying to understand the why behind it but nothing about it makes sense.

Pontius Pilate (cynically) summed up the mentality thusly, "what is truth"?!

 

[Koda]

Pontius Pilate (cynically) summed up the mentality thusly, "what is truth"?!

a clue as to Pilates true intentions while he pretended to defend the truth...?

 

[P7M13]

"ERDOZAIN: Well, it's such an illusion. I sometimes think that the bad guy is just a good guy who's having a bad day. You know that if you look at the data, the criminology, the sociology and what fascinated me most was the psychology of, really groundbreaking books written in the 70s, one called 'Violent Men,' one, 'Power and Innocence,' and makes the point that it's the good guy that you need to worry about is the good guy who has this sense of righteousness and the willingness to use violence."

Vilify the good guy, protect the bad guy. How does someone with such high levels of education get this ideology from? Why do we have such a huge disconnect with reality with such highly educated people?

Maybe one of his good family members will have a bad day, serving up a karmic education.

 

[AshWilliams]

I was perusing one of the articles and it seems that his argument, which I've seen from other historians, is that the 2nd amendment was written to ensure a regulated militia was in place instead of a permanent standing army, with the amendment protecting this specific arrangement.

One of my western civ professors taught that a student of history can never take an event or document out of context, and that it needs to be framed around political, economic, cultural, and oftentimes religious climates of the time. I've really been meaning to research this as it pertains to the 2A for my own benefit and understanding. Maybe when I retire... I'm also interested in English common law and how it influenced the thinking around private firearm ownership at the time.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4zE0K22zH8

 

[Stomper]

a clue as to Pilates true intentions while he pretended to defend the truth...?

No.... it was a cynical remark, as in, "phhpptt.... truth? What is 'truth' "?

He could find no wrong doing, he just wanted the problem to... "go away" so the status quo wouldn't be interrupted and get back to "counting the money".

 

[Stomper]

I was perusing one of the articles and it seems that his argument, which I've seen from other historians, is that the 2nd amendment was written to ensure a regulated militia was in place instead of a permanent standing army, with the amendment protecting this specific arrangement.

One of my western civ professors taught that a student of history can never take an event or document out of context, and that it needs to be framed around political, economic, cultural, and oftentimes religious climates of the time. I've really been meaning to research this as it pertains to the 2A for my own benefit and understanding. Maybe when I retire... I'm also interested in English common law and how it influenced the thinking around private firearm ownership at the time.

Due to spending the vast majority of their time in comfortable climate-controlled echo-chamber environments with lots of seat cushions, (most) intellectuals almost ALWAYS fail to grasp that the only "interpretation" (of any given subject) that matters is the one made by "those who have all the guns".

 

[red442joe]

I disagree, "anyone" seeking to remove or inhibit my 2A rights is an enemy!
Just that simple!

Dan

QFT

Joe

 

[red442joe]

Beating dead horse

People really do seem to think 2a means

"A well regulated (by laws of Congress and regulations of agencies) militia (military) being necessary for the security of a Free State (national security of America), the Right of the People (government, military and agents only) to keep and bear arms (restricted to civilians, unlimited to government) shall not be infringed (but civilians do not count here, only the government's Right counts) "

Geez, don't give 'em ideas!!

Joe

 

[red442joe]

I suppose it could be, but its just odd so many people with such high educations suffer from a mental disorder. Most of it is rooted in propaganda. I'm just baffled at the disconnect with reality. Its not just about guns either, everything is tied together but the lack of reality in the extreme leftists movement is mind boggling, I'm trying to understand the why behind it but nothing about it makes sense.

Perhaps the mental disorder seeks higher education?

Joe

 

[CamoDeafie]

Geez, don't give 'em ideas!!

Joe

No, just saying that's how many people have viewed 2A. "Collective right" "militia=National Guard", "arms don't mean every weapon", "People don't include all persons". "Shall not be infringed means govt has right not people"

Edit also
"Keep doesn't mean ownership"

And

"Bearing arms doesn't mean to carry without permits"


Edit 2

"The right of the People to keep and bear arms doesn't give a person an individual right to own and carry any gun/weapon they want", is the single biggest misconception that I've read far too often

 

[Bacchus]

Page of quotes from the Founding Fathers making their intentions regarding the Second Amendment very clear:

Gun Quotes

Also note that in the Bill of Rights every listed Right is an individual right. It's ridiculous to assert that in the middle of that list some text would be inserted about local national guards.