If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
In the inimitable words of George Mason...
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
"To disarm the people; that is the best and most effectual way to enslave them!" 1788
What brought about the war of our independence from British rule was the attempt to confiscate our weapons at Concord and Lexington. It did NOT work then, and it will NOT work now. There has been two centuries since that event; one would have thought that the point would have been made...
What brought about the war of our independence from British rule was the attempt to confiscate our weapons at Concord and Lexington. It did NOT work then, and it will NOT work now. There has been two centuries since that event; one would have thought that the point would have been made...
0
Comments
Just consider. A gun-bearing people without freedom of thought are still 'slaves' because they wouldn't know when to use the guns. An intelligent, free thinking people, will find ways to oppose a tyrannical regime regardless of whether or not it permitted them to own guns.
Without the tool at the "oppressed peoples'" disposal, resistance becomes a moot point, as they are ALREADY shackled. To NOT comprehend THAT is a vivid demonstration that the mind has ALREADY been enslaved and SHEEPIFIED!
I am NOT dependent upon the spoon-feeding of the propoganda news sources to KNOW where I stand on issues that directly affect MY life. Read some more George Orwell.
While you WERE born AFTER the bulk of the Vietnam conflict, and AFTER the social upheaval of the 60's, I was NOT. What you read about, I LIVED firsthand. You so obviously prefer to be the innocuous impotent self-styled elitest bleeting sheep... others choose to be the armed combatant. Confront me on the street, and witness which one of us should survive.
I HAVE been to war. I KNOW firsthand what it is to kill, and to confront those committed to killing me. Your impotent words will NEVER defeat in an armed conflict, and THAT is why you have been disarmed by those who control you! You are NOT a free man, but a subject, a chattel. THAT is why we as a nation state "You may have my guns when you pry them from my COLD DEAD HANDS!" Your state of enslavement is REPUGNANT!
MOLON LABE!!!
Your preference to depend upon "Big Brother" for your safety is DEFINITIVE of your pathetic enslavement. You demonstrate the lack of gonadal quality REQUISITE to BE a FREE man!
Follow your own advice: THINK!!!
[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited 12-08-2001).]
You might have spelled the damn phrase right...It makes your point a little better.
You MAY know how to spell the words, but you certainly do NOT know how to live up to them. I still HAVE my weapons; you have subjugated yourselves to the nefarious agenda of your owners/handlers.
TRY it THIS way: You want MY weapons? Come and GET them! They will be taken from me over YOUR DEAD BODY!
THAT clear enough???
You really think I am one of those you like to call "Sheeple"? All right, here's an exercise for you.
Think of something dear to you. I don't know, the right to life perhaps. Or freedom of religon. Or your dog.
Now give it up.
Think, for a whole day if you can, without that thing.
If you can do that I will accept you have a free mind. Otherwise, I think YOU are the sheep. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
And there's no need to patronize me about what combat is like. I know full well that combat is not an intellectual arena (until you get to the strategic levels, but that's beside the point).
To suggest that your ideals must be superior to mine because you possess superior firepower is, well... the Nazis were clearly morally superior to the Czechs and Poles, weren't they?
[This message has been edited by MacKenZie (edited 11-08-2001).]
How is giving up a freedom going to prove anything. Because we will not give up our rights because someone tells us it will be better if we do; that is what makes us free. If you read books, real books, you might come to realize that if the government is taking something away from you it is most likely because it threatens their interests.
ie. Fahrenheit 451, knowledge from book alows people to be free thinking. Government destroys books. Also this book shows that PC is bad and will one day make us all sheeple.
If a government wants to control you, it would be in it's best interests to take your ability to resist away from you. There is nothing you can do to argue this. Take a second and really think about it.
(1) Giving things up.
Perhaps quoting "the right to life" as something to give up was a bad move. What I should have said was "give up the idea of the right to life." I'm interested in whether your mind is so enamoured of certain ideas that you simply cannot let go of them, like some kind of castration complex.
If, hand on heart, you can say that you're prepared to give up, momentarily and in good faith, any idea whatsoever then I take my hat off to you as a free person. Until then, I consider you just as capable of "sheepish" behaviour and thought as the next man.
(2) Free Minds
I concede that overthrow of a government might be difficult bordering on impossible without access to arms. That's not in question.
To put it in criminal phaseology, the rebel must have means and motive (and opportunity). Give him both, and you're in trouble. Give him neither, you're safe. But if he has no motive, you are still safe, because there's no reason for him to rebel even though he holds the means to do so.
A gun may be damned helpful in a revolution. A free mind is essential.
That is the mark of Winston's defeat as a free man.
Btw, and in all seriousness, if there is a certain bit of Orwell you think I should read, tell me.
gandhi - overthrew the might of the british empire in India, without him or his followers firing a single shot. so dont talk shit about needing guns to gain freedom.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
At last, someone else remembers the Mahatma. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">x10000000
Thanatos, you seem to operate under the assumption that you are still at war, that there is an enemey hell-bent on killing you and destroying what you stand for. This may be the government of your country or merely the people you see on the street or a product of the society you live in.
My father used to trade in firearms, back when it was still legal to do so, and had an impressive private collection. He is a strong, independant thinker and much more politically aware than me, yet he did not think he was giving up his freedom and independance of mind when the law required him to hand his weapons in, he merely recognised that his hobby no longer fitted with the changing circumstances of our culture in the UK. He sure as hell didn't like it (he'd just acquired a Magnum .44 that he loved), but in giving up his firearms he didn't relinquish his freedom.
The point was not that Ghandi's strategy would always be successful. The point was to show that successful unarmed resistance is possible.
There's only one strategy that ALWAYS works, and it's so general it barely needs stating: adapt to the circumstances.
Are you suggesting that perhaps the British were too tolerant?
This really highlights the difference between the Indians and the Irish doesn't it? One negotiates independence and gets it, one tries to bomb their way to 'freedom' and yet the Brits remain.
I'd say we'd got it about right then.
The English treatment of Ireland has far more to do with geography than any ethical considerations by the English.
Rather futile, do you not agree, to attempt to argue with someone who has been BANNED because he has an alternate perspective? ... or is THAT the security which you desire?
Oh has he?? I should try keeping up with current events.
Only users lose drugs
Perhaps you can clarify this statement for me.
One (the USA) beat the Brits in the War of Independence, the other (Canada) is a memeber of the Commonwealth, with QEII as token Head of State.
And what has the Irish problem got to do with geography? The ethical question was me making a point about Ghandi, he didn't feel that he NEEDED guns to fight the Brits - he had 'right' on his side. The IRA however...
The Americans "bombed" their way to freedom. The Canadians negotiated it.
Ireland has tried both. The English remain. I suggest that it is because we are close, not because of ethical reasons or the "vote".