Quote from: DianaP on February 07, 2013, 03:22:32 PM
Well, here are some points I have to make:
1. No one said that the police protect individuals before crime happens. A police for is a deterrent that scares potential criminals from breaking the law, which includes harming other people. Also, if the police happen to be near a crime at the time it is performed, a criminal can be shot, if needed, and the police would have protected people. The fact that the police aren't at your side 24/7 doesn't mean that they can't protect you. They do it indirectly, which is why a lot of people under-appreciate police officers. If there wasn't a police force, we'd know what would happen, and we have seen it happen in relatively recent history.
so you support controlling people through fear? interesting... what does that say about the incredibly and increasingly vague term of 'criminal'? is it OK for police to scare me into not smoking marijuana? scare me into paying taxes? does that mean the gov can declare x, y, z is criminal activity and use their police goons to control us with fear? sounds like 1984
it's much better to educate people than distill fear in them... but then again, if what you want is immoral... it might help to indoctrinate the youth with lies and keep them in check with fear all the while telling them that they are protecting you LOL
Quote
3. Govt. regulation isn't always a bad thing. Seat belt laws are good because they make it less likely for people to have to pay for your large hospital bills. Plus, what about the mother of a person who was killed because he/she didn't wear a seat belt? There are other people besides yourself, you know. Gun regulation is no different. For all of you gun lovers, why are you so against gun regulation? If you don't have anything to hide in a background check, then you should have nothing to worry about, right? Not to mention that it is only reasonable to regulate the possession of a weapon that can kill someone as easily as point, pull trigger, kill. Or should we all be allowed to have RPGs, too?
regardless, you should educate, not legislate..
never force people to do anything... let them choose to act... the basis of freedom
every piece of legislation is ultimately backed by a gun... is it really necessary to have an invisible gun in your car threatening you unless you 'click it'? I don't support the threat of violence. I don't support coercion.
Quote
4. An armed society is not a safe society. There are plenty of mindless killing that involve no plan of escape or regard for legal ramifications. This type of person would not consider consequences. Plus, within a population of millions, there are bound to be people that would go crazy. Holding a gun makes people feel powerful and could easily lead to an irrational decision. Guns should be regulated, not allowed throughout the public readily.
there will always be crayzy people... when seconds count, the police are only minutes away
let people defend themselves from crayzy
Quote
6. Anarchy, while not deserving of the stigma it has, is a delusional person's dream. Anarchy involves following rules not because a government sets them out with consequences, but simply out of your own good character. An anarchist society requires that every individual governs his/her own actions, requiring that each individual be a perfect person. Not going to happen.
did you watch that video? the gov exists in a state of anarchy itself LOL... who watches the watchmen? the gov doesn't have a gov... if it did Bush would have gone to jail :-)
and do you really think that low of people that they can't govern themselves? really? you think the majority of people need authority to tell them how to act? that the majority of people have bad character? really?
everything comes down to education and the government schools... well they like to perpetuate their gospel and demand you pay worship through taxes... they will NEVER teach true freedom... if they did, they would be obsolete
