Are Guns Silencing Free Speech?

[DanP]

So enough about Switzerland... they're a tiny country with compulsory service, and frankl6y the fact that they need to maintain it in such a fashion IS a sign of military weakness. It's not social upheaval, but it's not exactly the lifestyle you get in the US where service is optional.

Ah, now judging the swiss Army how weak it is ? The truth is, that's a country with a higher living standard than US, and enough weapons to cause Armageddon, should they want it. None cares of anyone who carry SIGs
in plain sight. Assault riffles, you know ? They have balls.

 

[nismaratwork]

You mean, Swiss ppl are in trouble ? Ah no, because they have SIGs instead of AKMs. Maybe this is why they have one of the highest living standards on the planet.
I wonder if the fat chick in background is so scared of this man that she can't express her right to buy conserved vegetables, or speak, for that matter. But by the looks of it, she doesn't appear to care at all, for all she seem to care that man could carry a guitar and look more fearsome :P

Because by Swiss law she knows he's going to or from his MILITIA service. The USA equivalent would be National Guard, and if you see then with rifles, they're uniformed. See "cut the crap". You pick on tiny details in an argument you've professed not to care about or have any "side" on. What part of what you're doing, and did yesterday, is constructive to this thread? Are you sure you're not just flaming with a bit of an effete spin?edit: to respond to your spam since I typed this...

Ah, now judging the swiss Army how week it is ?

Compared to the USA... yes.

and...

Every able bodied male is in the militia till discharge age, amigo

So cut the crap.

Hi, we're talking about the USA, where able-bodied men can do whatever they want... or think they do. Now, you should also read those laws... we're talking about civilians carrying. You're using this Swiss-Myth strawman for... what? 'Educación Superior Abierta y a Distancia'

edit:

OK... your post 201 is now far larger, and really makes a totally different point. SO... response #2:

Ah, now judging the swiss Army how weak it is ? The truth is, that's a country with a higher living standard than US, and enough weapons to cause Armageddon, should they want it. None cares of anyone who carry SIGs
in plain sight. Assault riffles, you know ? They have balls.

OH, so it's about balls... got it. As long as we're sticking to the issues, and not just derailing this thread for personal reasons... good. Your new version of this post is arguably funnier than the original!

 

[DanP]

Because by Swiss law she knows he's going to or from his MILITIA service. '

Cut the crap. Since just about every able bodied male is in militia, it really doesn't matter.
Just about everyone has a SIG till 30something. Statistically, I doubt that there are more psychopaths in 1000 between age of 18 and 30 Americans than in 1000 Swiss militiaman. They should be scared but they are not. Balls :P
They don't care. They are not phased by assault rifles.

Your whole argument with weapons in plain sight and standard of living is luft.

 

[nismaratwork]

Cut the crap. Since just about every able bodied male is in militia, it really doesn't matter.
Just about everyone has a SIG till 30something. Statistically, I doubt that there are more psychopaths in 1000 between age of 18 and 30 Americans than in 1000 Swiss militiaman. They should be scared but they are not. Balls :P
They don't care. They are not phased by assault rifles.

Your whole argument with weapons in plain sight and standard of living is luft.

re: bold:

I have nothing more to say to you on this site.

 

[DanP]

r

I have nothing more to say to you on this site.

That's the moment I was praying for. Thank you God!

 

[IMP]

Civility please, EVO is going to lock this thread otherwise. Plus, it adds to the argument that if we can't be civil to each other then how can we be trusted to be armed at all times.

 

[nismaratwork]

Civility please, EVO is going to lock this thread otherwise. Plus, it adds to the argument that if we can't be civil to each other then how can we be trusted to be armed at all times.

Evo should lock this thread; if patterns hold, after Dan pays his nihilistic little visit, it's Drankin, then Mech_Engineer's turn.

Given that this thread is the "Seinfeld" of gun-threads, why not? I stand by the points I made at the outset: the 1st and 2nd amendments are not VERSUS each other, but it's also foolish to think there isn't a balance to be struck. In fact, as Mugaliens pointed out, those two rights work to protect one another in principle.

Jared feels that there is a conflict, and I think his point deserves some thought. Instead, like rigid children, everyone is just bringing out set-piece arguments, and just failing to actually address the content of either argument.

After all, how can you have a civil discourse with a person or people who don't want the same thing?

 

[DanP]

Evo should lock this thread; if patterns hold, after Dan pays his nihilistic little visit, it's Drankin, then Mech_Engineer's turn.

Sue us :P