Following the Oslo attacks, Germans are in "ban-mode" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 02:29:00 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Following the Oslo attacks, Germans are in "ban-mode" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Following the Oslo attacks, Germans are in "ban-mode"  (Read 3566 times)
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


« on: August 03, 2011, 08:57:53 AM »

I fail to see how banning guns makes people freer.

I bet the government itself is a bigger threat than guns. Maybe the German government should ban itself.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2011, 09:40:44 AM »

I fail to see how banning guns makes people freer.

IIRC, nobody made such claim.

That's the entire purpose of having a republic.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2011, 11:06:32 AM »

I fail to see how banning guns makes people freer.

IIRC, nobody made such claim.

That's the entire purpose of having a republic.

The purpose of a republic is that you don't have a monarch. Which isn't what these polls were about either...

Oh, so Germany was still a republic under Hitler? Was France a republic under Bonaparte?

It's a knee-jerk reaction to restrict liberty. Norway isn't exactly Switzerland, either. The direction of such a law wouldn't even make any sense.

The United States restricted liberty with the Patriot Act. A lot of good that did us.

These types of laws only serve to hurt liberty. Loss of liberty leads to the loss of free government (republic, despite your lazy terminology, means 'rule of law'). This means tyranny, where liberty is substantially even less.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2011, 01:52:44 PM »

Oh, so Germany was still a republic under Hitler? Was France a republic under Bonaparte?

In a strict sense, they were. So is currently China.

A democratic republic is merely a sub-category of the republican form of government.



These types of laws only serve to hurt liberty. Loss of liberty leads to the loss of free government (republic, despite your lazy terminology, means 'rule of law'). This means tyranny, where liberty is substantially even less.

Even if "republic" would mean "rule of law" I don't see how stricter gun control would violate or negate the rule of law provided that this stricter control was adopted through a democratic and constitutional process and could in theory be reversed through the same democratic and constitutional means.

You cannot have the rule of law and rule of the people at the same time.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2011, 10:46:51 PM »

You cannot have the rule of law and rule of the people at the same time.

You're not making much sense.

Okay, please study the Enlightenment and the Classical period, then discuss forms of government. It's very basic stuff.

I could give you the run down, but you likely wouldn't believe me. After all, it's the internetz.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.039 seconds with 13 queries.