RE: Right To Bear Arms

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Churvis [mailto:adamproductivityenhancement.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 10:24 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Right To Bear Arms
> 
> Anyone or anything that desires to infringe upon his
rights by force,
> and in
> the case of a government, by fraud as well.

Maybe this is the beginning of an answer (and I'm guessing
I'm only half
joking):

First off even we assume that we should have access to
weaponry that would
let us "fight the army" it seems logical to assume
that we're not talking
about one person being able to fight the army.  So the line
is really drawn
somewhere between the danger of a single persons firepower
if (when?) a
single person goes bat-shit crazy and the ability of many
people's aggregate
firepower to effectively combat the army.

Somewhere in the middle there...

(Of course all the "we've gotta be able to fight the
army" arguments are
bullshit.  This imaginary delineation between "us"
and the army has got to
go: the army is "us".  Do you think there will
ever be a case when the
entire non-enlisted citizenry will need to fight the entire
enlisted
segment?  Any situation like that will split soldier and
non-soldier alike.

Even if it did happen all we, as citizens, need to do is
join the army.
Then when we're in, take their guns.  Extra points if you
say "Zoinks!" as
you take them.)

Jim Davis


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
AdobeŽ ColdFusionŽ 8 software 8 is the most important and
dramatic release to date
Get the Free Trial
ht
tp://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w

Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:256925
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5

Actually we weren't supposed to even have a standing army. 
Only one 
that was raised during times of need and disbanded
afterwards.

Jim Davis wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Adam Churvis [mailto:adamproductivityenhancement.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 10:24 AM
>> To: CF-Community
>> Subject: RE: Right To Bear Arms
>>
>> Anyone or anything that desires to infringe upon
his rights by force,
>> and in
>> the case of a government, by fraud as well.
> 
> Maybe this is the beginning of an answer (and I'm
guessing I'm only half
> joking):
> 
> First off even we assume that we should have access to
weaponry that would
> let us "fight the army" it seems logical to
assume that we're not talking
> about one person being able to fight the army.  So the
line is really drawn
> somewhere between the danger of a single persons
firepower if (when?) a
> single person goes bat-shit crazy and the ability of
many people's aggregate
> firepower to effectively combat the army.
> 
> Somewhere in the middle there...
> 
> (Of course all the "we've gotta be able to fight
the army" arguments are
> bullshit.  This imaginary delineation between
"us" and the army has got to
> go: the army is "us".  Do you think there
will ever be a case when the
> entire non-enlisted citizenry will need to fight the
entire enlisted
> segment?  Any situation like that will split soldier
and non-soldier alike.
> 
> Even if it did happen all we, as citizens, need to do
is join the army.
> Then when we're in, take their guns.  Extra points if
you say "Zoinks!" as
> you take them.)
> 
> Jim Davis
> 
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
AdobeŽ ColdFusionŽ 8 software 8 is the most important and
dramatic release to date
Get the Free Trial
ht
tp://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w

Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:256928
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5

The bat-guano crazy peeps don't worry me so much with gun
ownership.

It is a problem, but not the main one. The number of gun
deaths to these
incidents, while splashy in the media, and painful to the
survivors, is just
not that big a societal deal, imho.

No more so than a crazy person driving full speed through a
crowd on campus,
or using farming fertilizer and fuel to bring down a
building.

The gun deaths that bother me much more are the casual
shootings at train
stations in Boston, or the tro boyfriends outside a woman's
work. Because,
without a gun, these punks would be less likely to attack,
and with a knife
or something, much less likely to kill.



On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Jim Davis <HOFListsdepressedpress.com>
wrote:

> So the line is really drawn
> somewhere between the danger of a single persons
firepower if (when?) a
> single person goes bat-shit crazy and the ability of
many people's
> aggregate
> firepower to effectively combat the army.
>
> Somewhere in the middle there...
>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
AdobeŽ ColdFusionŽ 8 software 8 is the most important and
dramatic release to date
Get the Free Trial
ht
tp://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w

Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:256929
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5

I think you have a distorted view of how these things really
happen.

It's not all of us against all of them; it isn't even most
of us against
most of them, at least not in a coordinated series of
battles, anyway.  It's
one citizen shooting one government official who went bad,
four citizens
taking out a federal government-installed puppet city
council meeting, two
citizens picking off national guardsmen a few per day until
they get the
message and begin to quit their posts, or have to expend a
lot more
resources to quell the disturbance (think "duty of a
prisoner of war").  

It's independent cells of citizens doing things of their own
accord to
strike back in any way they deem fit, knowing full well that
this may be
their final act on this Earth.

Eventually it makes a difference.  Sometimes it works,
sometimes it goes
bad, but whatever it does, it doesn't let oppressors have a
free hand.

There are a number of things far worse than death.

Respectfully,

Adam Phillip Churvis 
President
Productivity Enhancement

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Davis [mailto:HOFListsdepressedpress.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 12:34 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Right To Bear Arms
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adam Churvis [mailto:adamproductivityenhancement.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 10:24 AM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: RE: Right To Bear Arms
> >
> > Anyone or anything that desires to infringe upon
his rights by force,
> > and in
> > the case of a government, by fraud as well.
> 
> Maybe this is the beginning of an answer (and I'm
guessing I'm only
> half
> joking):
> 
> First off even we assume that we should have access to
weaponry that
> would
> let us "fight the army" it seems logical to
assume that we're not
> talking
> about one person being able to fight the army.  So the
line is really
> drawn
> somewhere between the danger of a single persons
firepower if (when?) a
> single person goes bat-shit crazy and the ability of
many people's
> aggregate
> firepower to effectively combat the army.
> 
> Somewhere in the middle there...
> 
> (Of course all the "we've gotta be able to fight
the army" arguments
> are
> bullshit.  This imaginary delineation between
"us" and the army has got
> to
> go: the army is "us".  Do you think there
will ever be a case when the
> entire non-enlisted citizenry will need to fight the
entire enlisted
> segment?  Any situation like that will split soldier
and non-soldier
> alike.
> 
> Even if it did happen all we, as citizens, need to do
is join the army.
> Then when we're in, take their guns.  Extra points if
you say "Zoinks!"
> as
> you take them.)
> 
> Jim Davis
> 
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
AdobeŽ ColdFusionŽ 8 software 8 is the most important and
dramatic release to date
Get the Free Trial
ht
tp://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w

Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:256934
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5