Mass shootings in US

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I'm imagining the same scenarios as were envisioned by the founders of the country and the framers of the Constitution.

You're not planning on trotting out the 'that was from a group of barely civilized band of marauders 239 years ago' argument, are you?

I'm not arguing.
Just asking for an example.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I'm not arguing.
Just asking for an example.

The state wishing to search or seize my property without due process, i.e., a judge-approved warrant, is at least less desirable with the state's knowledge of my armed status.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The state wishing to search or seize my property without due process, i.e., a judge-approved warrant, is at least less desirable with the state's knowledge of my armed status.

Explain how that safeguard works.
Describe [i]any[/i[ scenario where armed civilians are
going to prevent government tyranny (or whatever it is you fear)

And the scenario you present is the state entering your property without a warrant?

If that were true wouldn't the media be full of stories of police entering
premises without a warrant where the owners were unarmed?

The UK and NZ have no problem without being armed.

I don't think that is a very good scenario.
Surely you have something better?

.... evidently not. 😴

Originally posted by wolfgang59

Explain how that safeguard works.
Describe [i]any[/i[ scenario where armed civilians are
going to prevent government tyranny (or whatever it is you fear)

And the scenario you present is the state entering your property without a warrant?

If that were true wouldn't the media be full of stories of police entering
premises without ...[text shortened]... being armed.

I don't think that is a very good scenario.
Surely you have something better?

I'm afraid I don't understand your complaint.

Are you saying you think it's a preferred state of affairs for the government to wantonly raid the property of citizens?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I'm afraid I don't understand your complaint.

Are you saying you think it's a preferred state of affairs for the government to wantonly raid the property of citizens?

From what you have said this is what I understand, if wrong (and I am sure I am) please clarify.

Your best scenario of why US citizens need guns.

Government agents turn up at your door (lets say - for the sake of
argument - two highly trained, armed, FBI men) they request entry
to search your property. You ask for a Search Warrant which they
do not have. They then proceed to enter your premises.

You will then ... ?

Go get your gun and ask them to leave?
I'm sure that is NOT what you are thinking but without clarification I don't know.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
From what you have said this is what I understand, if wrong (and I am sure I am) please clarify.

Your [b]best scenario of why US citizens need guns.

Government agents turn up at your door (lets say - for the sake of
argument - two highly trained, armed, FBI men) they request entry
to search your property. You ask for a Search Warrant which ...[text shortened]... em to leave?
I'm sure that is NOT what you are thinking but without clarification I don't know.[/b]

I guess you just don't understand sovereignty, is all I can surmise.

Not sure where (or if) you draw the line when it comes to your property--- or even if property means anything to you--- but for folks who are aware of the value, that property is sacrosanct, and is to be guarded at all costs.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I guess you just don't understand sovereignty, is all I can surmise.

Not sure where (or if) you draw the line when it comes to your property--- or even if property means anything to you--- but for folks who are aware of the value, that property is sacrosanct, and is to be guarded at all costs.

Correct.
I do not understand the term "sovereignity" but I think that is the first
time it has entered our dialogue. I initially asked for a scenario
from you which demonstrated your assertion -
Here in the States, the limited government was formed with a wary eye on
the pervasive nature of historical ruling parties and the distrust was so
deep-seated, the Second Amendment to the Constitution listed a
well-armed citizenry as THE safeguard to keep in place.

Your scenario is vague so I filled in the blanks (wrongly).

What is the scenario you imagine?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Correct.
I do not understand the term "sovereignity" but I think that is the first
time it has entered our dialogue. I initially asked for a scenario
from you which demonstrated your assertion -
[i]Here in the States, the limited government was formed with a wary eye on
the pervasive nature of historical ruling parties and the distrust was so
dee ...[text shortened]... Your scenario is vague so I filled in the blanks (wrongly).

What is the scenario you imagine?

The scenarios I "imagine" are the very ones currently at play in the US: a police state which is becoming increasingly out of control.

The US citizen (as "imagined" by the Constitution) is the one for whom the government alliance is formed, not the other way around.
The government is the slave, not the owner/ruler... at least, according to the Constitution, if that relic is still relevant.

An out of control police state, acting as an agent of the government, will seize property, violate boundaries, prohibit free travel, engage in intimidation, imprison without due process, illegally take the lives of the citizenry without fear of reprisal or recompense.

These (and other) scenarios are exactly what is currently unfolding here in these United States.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The scenarios I "imagine" are the very ones currently at play in the US: a police state which is becoming increasingly out of control.

The US citizen (as "imagined" by the Constitution) is the one for whom the government alliance is formed, not the other way around.
The government is the slave, not the owner/ruler... at least, according to the Constitu ...[text shortened]... These (and other) scenarios are exactly what is currently unfolding here in these United States.

So having a gun isn't preventing anything then?

What are you and your gun doing about the Police State?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
So having a gun isn't preventing anything then?

What are you and your gun doing about the Police State?

What is your interest in my possible actions?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
What is your interest in my possible actions?

I think he is attempting to extricate from you a rational reasons for owning a gun, so far you have not been able to proffer one. Because the government may at some unspecified moment in time demand entry to my home without a warrant does not really cut it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I think he is attempting to extricate from you a rational reasons for owning a gun, so far you have not been able to proffer one. Because the government may at some unspecified moment in time demand entry to my home without a warrant does not really cut it.

I've not "proffered" one: in its place I've suggested several reasons to own a gun as it relates to an over-reaching government.

In addition to protection against my government, my guns offer a measure of protection from my fellow citizens on the off-chance any of them decide to impose their illicit will upon me, my family, other innocents or my property.

While the guns are not my only option, depending upon the situation they are one of the surest.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I've not "proffered" one: in its place I've suggested several reasons to own a gun as it relates to an over-reaching government.

In addition to protection against my government, my guns offer a measure of protection from my fellow citizens on the off-chance any of them decide to impose their illicit will upon me, my family, other innocents or my propert ...[text shortened]...
While the guns are not my only option, depending upon the situation they are one of the surest.

I see so paranoia is the reason that you own a gun.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I see so paranoia is the reason that you own a gun.

I notice with interest that you never challenged Galveston75 on his strong views on gun ownership...