JPH wrote:kellory wrote:...As to property. They were. Right or wrong, all feeling aside, they were property, chattel, bought and paid for just as your horse or cow, By the law of the land, they were property. Property that was killing people, and had to be stopped, by any means possible. Just as in a stampede, it is acceptable to shoot the cattle before they can kill you, or to turn them aside, or to pile up the bodies so the rest go around. Property that had to be controlled.
I will not debate this garbage. I won't even participate in a forum that allows it to remain on the site. I'm out until it has been removed.
JPH wrote:The logic in this discussion is making my brain hurt.
The ownership of high-cap mags is defended because it is a God given right. The ownership of slaves is defended because it was the law of the land. We need high-cap mags to defend against tyranny. If a slave stikes out against the people who hold them, it is murder.
Wow! If this is really who we are, I really do not want to be a part of it.
kellory wrote:Restricting my God given Right to defense is the issue, not how I do it. (and no one else's business.)
the ownership of slaves was a fact, and how they handled a threat is history, (it is not being defended, just explained)
High caps to defend anything I need to defend, and no one has the right to handicap that, no matter how small a handicap.
And a slave striking down an owner, is by the nature of the law that allows a slave to exist IS MURDER. A slave by it's very nature has no rights, the owner does. I do not defend the system. merely state the facts. Law made it murder. History is not there to amuse you, it is a fact, learn from it, improve upon the mistakes others have made, and move on.
JPH wrote:Well, with that in mind your remarks about chattle and property are rather chilling.
Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 8 guests