CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Why do you think they're limiting magazine sizes and such? They're working towards a ban. And if you think the people will just rise up as one, forget it. Most people are sheep and will act counter to what is best for the survival of the country. Since in life, sheep are very, very stupid creatures. They will follow a lead sheep to their death, even off a cliff.
When guns are totally banned, only criminals will have them... and I will be one of em. So, all I can say is... I'll deal with that day when it comes. Not that I believe it ever will.
TO who ever downvoted me, it'd be more efficient in proving your point by leaving a reason, in either the form of a dispute or a clarification for why I was downvoted. Simply downvoting does not let me know my error.
What's legal is what the government says is legal. If the government wants to arrest you without due process, without giving a reason, they very well can and it won't be labeled illegal because they make, and they enforce the laws.
Those are all the government, if it has gotten as far as the people, and the government (the president, the congress, the supreme court) has decided on gun control, who's going to arrest them for it?
Okay. The militia is not the government. It's your right to rise up against that law, if the population didn't vote on it. That does not mean you are legally allowed to. You would still be arrested.
Tyranny is of a tyrant's, rule. As in a tyrant's law. If you are acting outside of the law, you are doing something illegal.
The laws are not enforced by the people. They are not made by the people. The people are supposed to have power in government, in a democracy, but if the acting ruler says screw democracy, the people are no longer the government, they are just civilians to be ruled.
And that's not how our country was meant to be. We chose our rulers they work for us when they don't do the move we hired them to we fire them and when they turn on us we punish them hence the reason we have the second amendment.
Yes, all of this is true. Yet what is legal, is what the government, as in the officials in charge, say. If they say it's legal to revoke your rights, it's legal. You obviously can still fight for them, but you will be acting outside of the law.
The government wrote the constitution. This whole debate is like saying would killing someone be illegal in anarchy. If there is no government there are no official laws. You are pressing a point that is literally not worth pressing. What difference does it make if we say that gun control is illegal? Who's going to arrest them?
Who would arrest them? Law enforcement politicians aren't above the law. The fact it in this country there are some things the government is simply not allowed to do.
Law enforcement, and politicians don't have to be above the law they make it. If it's made into a law that people are no longer allowed to have guns. Cops won't start arresting the government for that. If anything, cops will come to where you live to take your guns, seeing as they work for the government. Yet as it's been brought to my attention, the word I've been neglecting this whole time is "right". It is legal, but it's not "right".
In some places that might happen but I happen to know police officers both in real life and on the Internet who have told me that if such a thing were to happen they would be more likely to quit the force and join the rebellion that such an event would be shure to incite then disarm law abiding citizens.
Exactly! They'd quit the force. Then they would join the group of people acting outside of the law. You don't get it, you're even saying it. It would under no circumstances be right to force law abiding citizens give up their guns, but the government does not have to uphold your rights, that's a courtesy you happen to have because you live in a democracy. They make the laws, what they say is legal, is. What they say is illegal isn't. Is it illegal to ban marijuana? Right ≠Legal.
The constitution limits the power of the government they can't just do whatever they want. If they make a law that violates the constitution it becomes invalade.
What hitler did was legal because the German constitution didn't forbid it. And it is legal to ban marijuana and cigarets but guns are protected by the constitution.
You don't think that guess was a little unfounded? What government would set up it's principles with mass genocide being legal? The reason he wasn't illegal, is because he had all the power, and declared it more or less legal. Here's another example, during world war two, in America their were Japanese Internment. Why was that not illegal or if it was why didn't the government get arrested?
Before you call red herring, I thought about that, and it's not to distract from the point, it's to address the similarities to the government doing something unconstitutional, but it still not being called illegal because they are the government.
Just because the government got away with it doesn't mean they didn't commit a crime. What I see happening now is a growing number of people standing up and saying next time will be different next time they won't get away with it next time we will act.
I'm well aware of that. A dictator does, in his country, legal things that exploit the rights of his citizens often. I never said legal was right, I only stated the government is not doing anything illegal by making unjust laws.
That's the same thing. It is illegal for the government to do anything that is unconstitutional. So illegal and unconstitutional mean essentially the same thing.
No it's a rights sort of thing. The fact of the matter is when a government distrusts its citizens with guns its probably because its up to something the citizens won't like.
I see.. and this thing that the citizens don't like (lets call it 'top secret plan X' from now on) won't be successful if citizens have guns? Because they'll shoot the government?
It's easier to oppress people who aren't armed. Remember we beat the professional well trained well equipped British army when we were nothing more than a barely organized band of farmers and shop keepers.
Was there any evidence of the holocaust that was available to the German people during or prior to the time period in wich the genocide occurred? No. Was there any evidence that Stalin purposefully starved thousands of Ukrainian farmers to death that was available to the rest of the world during of prior to the time period in which the genocide occurred? No. Was there any evidence of the Armenian genocide that was available to the rest of the world during or prior to the time period in which the genocide occurred? No. Did the Jewish people have any way of knowing about the concentration amps and death camps prior to their arrival to such facility's? No. Did the lack of evidence for any of the afore mentioned occurrences/ facility's mean that they did not happen/ exist? No. Just because you are not aware of something doesn't mean it isn't real.
Well yes there was evidence of the holocault. But anyway that's not the point. The point is why do you believe in top secret plan X? Just because they're trying to take your guns away? So therefore they must be trying to exterminate you? Is that really how your logic works?
My point was that even though evidence for those genocides existed the people not directly involved where unaware of it so as far as they were concerned there was no evidence. And if you went back in time and tried to tell them about what was going on they would probably call you a conspiracy theorist. But any way to answer your question its not that I think the government is going to commit a genocide but I do see that my government is and has for some time been becoming more and more powerful and controlling.
