cimmaronkid
03-24-2007, 08:43 PM
How about a little “pro v con” debate from six of the most famous people in history on owning firearms?
First the “Pro” platform:
“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.”—Mahatma Gandhi (Autobiography, by M.K. Gandhi, p.446)
And our second “Pro” champion:
“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”—The Dalai Lama (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times), speaking at the “Educating Heart Summit” in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate.
And our third pro speaker which is one of all of our favorites:
Hamilton:“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recourse left but in the exertion of the original right of self-defense which is paramount to all forms of positive government.”
And Hamilton again:“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
And now the “con” argument (and I do mean con)
“Gun control? It’s the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I’m a bad guy, I’m always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You’ll pull the trigger with a lock on, and I’ll pull the trigger. We’ll see who wins.”—Sammy “The Bull” Gravano, Mafia hit man
Speaker #2
“A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.”—B]Vladimir Ilyich Lenin[/B]
And no discussion would be complete without this old “con”:
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty.”—Adolf Hitler (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler’s Table Talks 1941-1944)
Perhaps the debate is best ended by Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp of Texas, who said:
“How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.”
I think that we all know what side we are on!
First the “Pro” platform:
“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.”—Mahatma Gandhi (Autobiography, by M.K. Gandhi, p.446)
And our second “Pro” champion:
“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”—The Dalai Lama (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times), speaking at the “Educating Heart Summit” in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate.
And our third pro speaker which is one of all of our favorites:
Hamilton:“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recourse left but in the exertion of the original right of self-defense which is paramount to all forms of positive government.”
And Hamilton again:“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
And now the “con” argument (and I do mean con)
“Gun control? It’s the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I’m a bad guy, I’m always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You’ll pull the trigger with a lock on, and I’ll pull the trigger. We’ll see who wins.”—Sammy “The Bull” Gravano, Mafia hit man
Speaker #2
“A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.”—B]Vladimir Ilyich Lenin[/B]
And no discussion would be complete without this old “con”:
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty.”—Adolf Hitler (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler’s Table Talks 1941-1944)
Perhaps the debate is best ended by Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp of Texas, who said:
“How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.”
I think that we all know what side we are on!